As you know I study Vunaks material. One of your last posts, you still that you still use and teach the RAT system, but you've modified it. I assume that you've added more wrestling stuff like the clinch. Could you go further and explain more how you teach it and make it work?

If anyone has experience with RAT please feel free to posts, my experience is only limited to DVD's. And private practice with a few close friends of mines.

LOL...You sound excited. Personally I cant wait to read what your going to post. I used to buy MA magazines for this type of insight, now I get it straight from the source. I look forward to reading everything you post, and I have tons of questions. I hope you don't mind.

Once again I extend an invitation to everyone who has experience with RAT/JKD/concepts/style w/e... please join in and have fun.

P.S. while true that Paul Erickson was one of the first JKD men to add bjj to his system, what has he contributed for actual functional self defense? So far all i can find on him is techniques for MMA matches. Not for self defense or street fighting.

TEK, you understand the principles behind the RAT concept. Three core modes; interception, pressure and termination (hate using that word...I prefer the term "resolution").

So what's happening is that Voo was using eye jabs and destructions as his intercept..more or less, right? Then the straight blast as his pressure tactic. After that it was the double neck tie as his delivery system for knees, elbows and the headbutt.

Well, conceptually, none of that has changed really. What's been modified as some of the tactics for accomplishing each end.

Lets start with the intercepts. I don't like the long-range eye jab that Vunak LOVES. I do however like the elbow destruction and use it quite regularly to great effect in the gym. We've all felt it and it hurts, even through 16oz boxing gloves. The problem with teaching that to folks is, those are just "moves". That's a whole other issue beyond what we're trying to discuss presently.

I don't like the eye jab because there is nothing on it. Honestly, I would rather pop someone with a stiff jab than to "flick" an eye jab out. The jab has more on it. Taking a slight step forward into it can disrupt someone's timing, rhythm and footwork, etc. It's just more substantial. Ever walk right through someone's weak jab? People will. If a person doesn't have a jab worthy of respect, a person will walk straight through it. Flicking an eye jab out is weaker than the weakest jab if it doesn't land on the eyeball (which is a small target for a small weapon - in other words, it's hard to hit, particularly if your opponent is hitting you and otherwise has his guard/hands up as well). Thus I've thrown the eye jab out. Besides, eye jabs are easily thrown if you've been working your boxing jab any length of time. I would just rather have a credible, legitimate and verifiable technique (in terms of having seen it land and having seen the results in training). Thus, the jab is an even BETTER intercept as it accomplishes the same things in a better manner.

The "spike" (elbow destruction) is something that I've seen to work. With good timing and out of a boxing delivery system, that is something that I consider "high percentage" (which is the only thing I keep, everything else is thrown out).

So, from an interception point of view, having a decent boxing game is TEN times better than practicing eye jabs and destructions by themselves. If I had to put my money on someone in a fight, I would always put it on a boxer vs. some guy that has been practicing eye jabs. Just me.

The straight blast is "ok". I would personally rather use the modified "boxing blast", but I'm not going to completely throw out the straight blast altogether. The problem with that is again, that there is nothing on it, unless you can run into it full-bore. If you're using it to obtain the clinch, I think it's ok. My only opinion here is that the boxing blast is safer. You have to have more timing when using that because it's slower. But timing is an important attribute anyway and it's worth developing. Thats another reason why training delivery systems is important rather than just learning moves.

In terms of pressure (which the blast is designed to do), one can also use good boxing combinations to do the same thing. Pressure doesn't obviously have to always be "forward". Pressure can come by a disparity of skill and force. In other words, throw good tight combos in the face of someone who can't box and you'll see them fold up like a chair. Thats another form of pressure that comes from having functional delivery systems.

The "termination" stage is simply either chooing to disengage (pretty easily if you're outclassing someone, difficult if you're not) or choosing to "beat on them like they stole something" (to borrow a phrase). Whether that happens in the free movement range or happens in the clinch doesn't matter. But if we're talking about the clinch, I personally want to control at least one arm and the neck, as opposed to just the neck alone. I prefer to have an all-around clinch game rather than just the double neck tie. More options = mo' better.

All in all, it's still fundamentally the same - put some hurt on your opponent more than he does to you in ways which are simultaneously offensive and defensive, as the RAT was intended to be.

In regard to Erik Paulson, he develops "delivery systems" as opposed to just teaching someone a collection of moves. There's a difference. However, an armbar in MMA is an armbar on the street, or anywhere else. A punch is a punch. A shoulder lock is a shoulder lock. You have to have an athletic model of training these attacks and that's all he does. His fighters are more than capable of defending themselves because of his approach. It's hard to argue with athleticism, conditioning, experience and skill.

Quote:The straight blast is "ok". I would personally rather use the modified "boxing blast", but I'm not going to completely throw out the straight blast altogether. The problem with that is again, that there is nothing on it, unless you can run into it full-bore. If you're using it to obtain the clinch, I think it's ok. My only opinion here is that the boxing blast is safer. You have to have more timing when using that because it's slower. But timing is an important attribute anyway and it's worth developing. Thats another reason why training delivery systems is important rather than just learning moves.

Whats the difference between a boxing blast and a straight blast John?

When I've seen the straight blast demonstrated it always looks like the person doing it is firing off the back leg, much like in Wing Chun chain punching...and they always look to me like they only ever go in straight lines. I've not played with any JKD people but the WC people I messed around with just seem to punch their way straight into my clinch with any extremely high center of gravity. When you talk about a boxing blast are you talking working behind a good stiff jab? I tend to launch my jabs off a slight lateral step and work on jarring them out of the feet. I find the lateral step with an angled jab lines you up perfectly for the follow up cross.

Whats the difference between a boxing blast and a straight blast John?

Simply put, a straight blast is vertical chain punching and the boxing blast is horizontal chain punching. The boxing blast is thrown like you would throw a jab/cross combo that becomes a series of crosses because of changing footwork that puts each hand thrown as the rear hand.

Quote:

When I've seen the straight blast demonstrated it always looks like the person doing it is firing off the back leg, much like in Wing Chun chain punching...and they always look to me like they only ever go in straight lines.

The wing chun blast IS often thrown off the back leg, which is bad enough. If you're going to do a vertical blast, it requires great speed forward and you're not easily going to get the needed speed by throwing off your back leg and shuffling forward. A 6 year old can move out of the way of that.

The JKD blast is performed by running forward with your weight practically forward. There is little power however on the actual punches when compared to the boxing blast.

Quote:I've not played with any JKD people but the WC people I messed around with just seem to punch their way straight into my clinch with any extremely high center of gravity.

The high center of gravity is common to both methods (JKD and WC). Or rather, the COG tends to be higher, lets put it that way.

The boxing blast actually uses a lower COG which both contributes to it being somewhat slower, though more powerful.

Quote:

When you talk about a boxing blast are you talking working behind a good stiff jab? I tend to launch my jabs off a slight lateral step and work on jarring them out of the feet. I find the lateral step with an angled jab lines you up perfectly for the follow up cross.

You've taken the words right out of my mouth. That little lateral step lines the cross up perfectly doesn't it?

Sure the blast is typically started off behind a solid jab, which you then follow behind with great pressure from alternating crosses.

You really have to play with it to get a feel for the footwork required. It's a little awkward at first and the initial set-up is important from a footwork perspective. If you take too big a lateral step, you won't have as much pressure moving forward.

The lateral step is good to help set up the rear hand as mentioned. But when I'm doing that, I'm typically just working my boxing and not moving forward a great deal. When I want to hit the boxing blast, I'll take more of a step forward with the jab and then immediately follow behind it with the blasts. This says NOTHING about the set-ups and timing involved....

Quote:The boxing blast is thrown like you would throw a jab/cross combo that becomes a series of crosses because of changing footwork that puts each hand thrown as the rear hand.

Sounds like you use the same footwork as me mate. Standing orthodox if I'm going laterally to left I step into the left foot and throw a traditional jab. If I'm moving laterally to the right I actually cut across using my right foot so my left "jab" actually becomes a left cross due to the lateral step into the right foot. If that makes sense.

I find the lateral step into the right foot and firing off the left hand brilliant for setting up a lovely right hand step through cross as well. If you step into right foot and throw the left hand in chucks your body weight into the right foot. This means stepping back into the left transfers the body weight into a short sharp monster of a right cross that was set up with the left handed shot.

I also find that a lot of people make the step too long or short, too wide or not quite wide enough. I try to get my guys to line the shoulder/hip/foot they are hitting with into the target. That usually gives them a basis from which to play with and stops them hitting off their line of power.

As well as its offensive capabilities that lateral step also takes you off line of your opponents attacking line meaning that they are going to have to work for the counter, be it a jab, kick or shoot.

I agree WC chain punches are easy to get up under or trade punches with. The modified boxing blast as mentioned is slower but does real damage quickly to an opponent use to taking strikes to the face and returning blows. Or just a good counter puncher. Both will lead to someone being taken down but the boxer blast the damage is done. Also bc of the lower COG and slower powerful strikes if he ducks you can stand him back up or hammer him down.

I'm still here, still paying attention, you kind of summarized your first post, glad others are posting questions also. I'm still trying to organized my own.

Since the first question was regarding the straight blast. And how you personally have substituted pressure with a boxers blast or a boxing combination. I would just point out that the straight blast is the most direct and probably the simplest approach, yet not the only approach to applying pressure. But even for a layman it is pretty easy, which I guess is what Vunak was going for.

Still more to come regarding clinching taller people, head butts, groin strikes and eye gouges.

Oh and I really want to know how you've applied a wrestlers clinch to RAT. I really wanna hear about that John.

I am practically using the entire defensive structure these days from Vunak's RAT for my MMA stand-up defense (small gloves and bare knuckle situations).

What I've found is that what I has been using was very similar in many ways (R. King's "Crazy Monkey") to begin with. The only difference was what I noticed when takedowns were allowed, the "CM" structure had to be further modified. Once having modified it, I was right back to the Vunak structure (use of high guard covering with elbow destructions).

The only thing I've done to modify that for boxing striking is to use King's method of "diving" behind the strikes (firing high off the temple regions instead of dropping the hands to chin level to fire).

Use of distance and timing is important. You have to log a lot of hours sparring to dial it in.

What this yields is the ability to punch as well as enter behind your elbows as striking and defense tools. Once you're attached (have a tie up), you can work the knees as well.

The only thing I've done is spent a lot of time working pummeling from the neck and the body to work my counters and takedowns.

Really that isn't a great deal different than muay Thai (which does a lot of neck pummeling obviously). The only difference is the emphasis on the takedowns as well as the strikes.

Obviously on the street, the emphasis is always on breaking contact, but we like to have options. Takedowns are those options. We have to modify the ground positions to factor in more variables (such as the opponents friends and possible weapons, etc), otherwise when looking at it, it's straight up RAT, trained with aliveness and more options on the "termination/resolution" end of things -- particularly from a structural point of view.

However I've seen a lot of similar things in many Filipino martial arts where destructions are emphasized. Again, nothing much is different here save for the wrestling takedowns (as well as a few silat things I have seen that work for me).

Another component that I think is neglected in the CM style stuff is the effectiveness of hand fighting and the ability to control an opponents structure via wrist, tricep and bicep tie ups as you enter in the clinch. Spending all your time sparring with big gloves on I think can breed a false sense of security as to how vulnerable you can be when you punch for it to be latched onto and then pummelled in on. One thing I did like on the CM stuff was the squaring off of the shoulders more than a more traditional boxing/kick boxing style stance and utilising a twist of the waist against the hips. A squarer stance allows for better lateral movement (great for footwork - both offensive and defensive) IMO and brings the right hand more forward. A lot of boxers I've trained with often use their left (or right for southies) as the working hand and the right back reserved mainly for dropping bombs with occasional parrying. Squaring the shoulders and hips off more brings the back hand into play to allow to be a working hand...both offensively and defensively.

Quote:Another component that I think is neglected in the CM style stuff is the effectiveness of hand fighting and the ability to control an opponents structure via wrist, tricep and bicep tie ups as you enter in the clinch.

Could not agree more on the importance for hand fighting, etc. Having actually trained with Rodney, I can say that they do work their grappling more than they let on when "in house", although it isn't shown as much in his material. Part of the reason for that was because they had other coaches who were putting that stuff out when he belonged to his former organization.

I agree and think that hand fighting and pummeling is very important and worth spending a lot of time doing on their own (with and without strikes; just wrestling in the clinch).

To me, that's where a lot of real "trapping" occurs. How useful is hand fighting to self-defense?! Indispensable in my eyes.

Quote:

Spending all your time sparring with big gloves on I think can breed a false sense of security as to how vulnerable you can be when you punch for it to be latched onto and then pummelled in on.

I agree again and this is why I feel that if people aren't training with the smaller MMA gloves these days, they are missing something. I think boxing gloves too are important as well for the ability to go harder with more safety, but you definitely can't neglect the grappling aspect in your training.

I also agree that you have to be more squared on. Of course this means you have to have a good understanding of distance and clinch control.

When I mentioned that I use the RAT structure for my defense, I should clarify myself. I use that from the long range and in its essence, is really not that different at all from the CM structure. I probably should have been more careful with my choice of words.

However, the similarities between the CM structure and the high outside structure from the long range used by Voo and Crew are dramatic. CM without gloves (the modifications for MMA and street) is practically the same thing. The hands are higher and you use your elbows for defense (destructions) a lot.

I see no discernible difference between the two. I have to still pull my stomach in, roll my shoulders forward and change my level slightly. All practically the same thing. Its as if the two structures are one and the same.

The individuals behind these approaches may not have meant for that to happen or realize the similarities. But, having done both in training, I am beginning to see certain common points where they coalesce.

I think the one thing that Rodney does that perhaps a lot of PFS guys didn't (for a long time) was to emphasize more aliveness and harder striking during training.

After having done that myself using both the bigger boxing gloves as well as MMA gloves, I have seen the beauty of Vunak's approach as it applies to fighting.

One thing I've seen is that almost any approach can work providing that you "functionalize" it with aliveness.

One thing you begin to see after awhile is that with aliveness, there truly are no false stylistic borders. You realize that there is truly only "one style" in the grand scheme of things and, that there are things that work for you now, and things that might at some later point.

If you don't mind. I'd like to jump around to different parts of the RAT beginning with what you prefer to call Resolution. Once you've reached the point of trapping range, you literally have a plethora of techniques you can apply. Vu however, prefers to apply the most simplistic, hard hitting of tools(HKE's). Which is part of his street fighter approach vs martial artist. Easier for non MAist to remember and train.

Its from trapping that you really begin to explore other avenues from different styles in order to expand on your art? Meaning this is where u can employ, your judo sweeps, wrestling take downs, tai chi throws, and bjj submissions. Dealing with an infinite amount of outcomes. Not to say that the Entry and Pressure portion of the RAT is standardized because as you know it isn't set in stone. As you stated that straight blast is not the only way to create pressure.Assuming I am on the right track so far.

My question then is, how crucial do you consider the thumbing on the eyes prior to any clinch?

As for me I can only come up with one conclusion after watching so many MMA fights, and how ineffective the clinch can be w/o attacking the eyes, throat, groin, or shins. Borrowing from that small moment in time similar to the way you make your initial Entry. I don't see the clinch being has successful if one of these critical areas aren't attack first.

P.S.

As a reminder of my background in PFS, I have never trained with an instructor, all of my knowledge have been though article stacks, and instructional DVD's. I have around 35 Vunak DVD's all are consistent with his main stream approach to street fighting. I practice with a small group of friends most are like myself former TKD practitioners.

Jkogas, I still have questions regarding your bjj and how much of the art you have implemented into your system.

Your thoughts on Kino Mutai the uninterrupted art of biting and eye gouging, and Vu's fusion of it with bjj.

more questions to come about CM, there are Rodney King dvd's available to me, however, I have just been so overwhelmed with Vu's material and excited by it, that I don't wanna add more to my plate.

I hope your still around to help enlighten me with this stuff. I really appreciate it.

If you don't mind. I'd like to jump around to different parts of the RAT beginning with what you prefer to call Resolution. Once you've reached the point of trapping range, you literally have a plethora of techniques you can apply. Vu however, prefers to apply the most simplistic, hard hitting of tools(HKE's). Which is part of his street fighter approach vs martial artist. Easier for non MAist to remember and train.

Resolution or “termination”....it all means essentially the same thing. We realize that it's all semantics, yet you know how the power of words are...

Anyway, I understand and appreciate Vu's philosophy of using the HKE's. I disagree with a couple of ways they do it and I also don't believe that they are necessarily easy to train or remember (not arguing your point, arguing his). I think its tougher than most folks realize. But, onto the rest of your post....

Mostly it isn't a matter of the tools themselves not being worthwhile or “effective”, for me its a matter of how you train them. That's what is more important in my eyes. This is the area where I have some disagreement with the PFS approach.

Quote:

Its from trapping that you really begin to explore other avenues from different styles in order to expand on your art? Meaning this is where u can employ, your judo sweeps, wrestling take downs, tai chi throws, and bjj submissions. Dealing with an infinite amount of outcomes. Not to say that the Entry and Pressure portion of the RAT is standardized because as you know it isn't set in stone. As you stated that straight blast is not the only way to create pressure. Assuming I am on the right track so far.

Trapping is just what I refer to as the clinch. Again, semantics really. We call this the “Dirty Boxing” range. It's essentially the same thing; working the neck-tie. There are two core clinch types; the neck-tie as well as the body clinch (the under-hook, over-hook and the over-under) But we can discuss these later.

Quote:My question then is, how crucial do you consider the thumbing on the eyes prior to any clinch?

I think the whole eye-attack thing is over-emphasized for the most part really. I would place a higher priority on obtaining position, and transitioning from one position to another. I believe that is far more important than a specific attack. Its like in BJJ where position before submission (attack) is prioritized. The same should be true of the clinch.

And while I realize that the idea is to thumb the eyes as you move into position, I believe the attack isn't all its cracked up to be, and in some cases only energizes your opponent to fight you back harder! This is a very real occurrence and people rarely give this any consideration.

The reason I think the attack is over-valued is because in a real fight, adrenaline is pumping. When you're in a position to hit such an attack, an opponent who's adrenaline is pumping isn't going to react to the eye gouge in any significant way. The time to hit the eye gouge or eye jab is BEFORE the attack has begun and before the adrenaline is pumping. That's my viewpoint. Before the fight, great. During the fight, not so great. Of course, we're only discussing fighting right now, not actually doing it. There are always going to be exceptions to the rule.

The idea in a fight is to take the will to fight from your opponent. In theory, you don't beat a man, you beat his will. Its just that if your opponent's skill is greater, you'll never test his will. If your skill is greater, he won't be able test your's. Thus to hit an eye gouge on a superior opponent just means that the retribution will be even greater for such an act, lol. Doing so on an inferior opponent is just overkill.

However, if you're clearly dominant in fighting, particularly with respect to position, covering the face and pressure over the eye socket (like you're pretending that you're going to gouge into the eye) can make a guy quit sometimes. I've seen it happen. That's a story for another time.

Quote:

As for me I can only come up with one conclusion after watching so many MMA fights, and how ineffective the clinch can be w/o attacking the eyes, throat, groin, or shins. Borrowing from that small moment in time similar to the way you make your initial Entry. I don't see the clinch being has successful if one of these critical areas aren't attacked first.

To answer this, I will say that I work the clinch all the time and manage to dominate it without having to attack any of those areas first (Eyes, throat, groin or shins. In fact, you should be able to work for dominant position without having to hit one of those attacks if for nothing other than to make it easier when you DO execute those said attacks. This should constitute the bulk of your clinch training. Learn to pummel. Work hand fighting, body pummeling, neck pummeling, etc. Add those things into your training because doing so will only facilitate these attacks.)

The reason for this, is because I train the clinch as a delivery system drawing from muay Thai and Greco-Roman wrestling. Greco-Roman is the missing link in most people's clinch games. Without that, there will be a rather large hole within the skill-sets of most people. From this practice, skill in positional control is developed. This is the thing that allows you to dominate the clinch positionally. Once you dominate positionally, you can then attack with whatever you want to, HKE, or whatever. Not only that, but you'll do so with even greater ability than without such training.

I don't know if this answers your question, but so long as the discussion continues, I'm sure we'll make some inroads into the topic.

Quote:P.S.As a reminder of my background in PFS, I have never trained with an instructor, all of my knowledge have been though article stacks, and instructional DVD's. I have around 35 Vunak DVD's all are consistent with his main stream approach to street fighting. I practice with a small group of friends most are like myself former TKD practitioners.

Thats ok, but I am going to give you a recommendation that will take your skill to another level (and we all want to improve don't we?). You and your partners always want to get better and better, right? So what you do is now (if you haven't done so already, that is) begin to develop what I refer to as the core delivery systems. They are; the free movement range (aka, “stand-up), clinch and the ground. Now you may already understand the concept of the “ranges”. But I'm asking that you look at them in another light. Your objective should be to practice and develop the fundamental skills of each delivery system. Those are the foundation platforms from which everything is built. That is in itself, another discussion. But I'm giving you the best advice that I can, coming from your school of thought. Trust me on this, you'll appreciate having done so.

Quote:

Jkogas, I still have questions regarding your bjj and how much of the art you have implemented into your system.

First of all, call me John.

To answer this, BJJ is the primary art for the ground delivery system (again, you need all three in your game in order to be well-rounded and adaptable). Thus BJJ is pretty important to say the very least. However that doesn't mean you have to grapple in every fight you're involved in. It just means that should the fight hit the grapple, you're not in unfamiliar territory....which is pretty important for any astute JKD man I'd say

Quote:

Your thoughts on Kino Mutai the uninterrupted art of biting and eye gouging, and Vu's fusion of it with bjj.

Honestly, I don't fool with it. I see little to no reason for biting and eye gouging. I would see more of a need to having practical skill and grappling ability than an ability to bite. Biting is easy. I practice it at least on three separate occasions per day .

However, skill in delivery systems doesn't always come naturally. This goes back to what I said earlier about how you don't beat man, you beat his will. Attacks by and of themselves won't do this, otherwise any local “billy” who understood the lead jab, would be able to beat a world-class boxer. That isn't the case because of the disparity in skill. In other words, the boxer's will wouldn't get tested.

So it goes that if you can grapple, there'd be no NEED to bite. Besides biting just reminds your opponent of what he can do to YOU. Yes, I do understand the positioning involved in kino mutai, but if you have skill in BJJ, you can probably sweep and hit submissions as well. To be perfectly honest, I'd rather hit a sweep and be on top than pin myself underneath someone just so that I could bite him uninterruptedly. Give me a top position and a good ground & pound versus biting any day; for a variety of reasons.

But regardless of my opinion, I think the discussion is tremendously important both for ourselves as well as any other PFS folks as well as anyone interested in self-preservation. The deeper and longer you extend these conversations, the better.

Quote:more questions to come about CM, there are Rodney King dvd's available to me, however, I have just been so overwhelmed with Vu's material and excited by it, that I don't wanna add more to my plate.

I hope your still around to help enlighten me with this stuff. I really appreciate it.

-Tek

Anytime bro. I try to help wherever I can. I am by no means, the be all, end all authority on martial arts. But I've certainly been down those roads (I am an instructor in the PFS system although I too am not currently listed on Vu's site). I'm at a different place now yet is ultimately all the same. That's hard to explain but I'll try over the course of later discussions.

personally, I wouldnt see this attack working too well. John mentioned earlier about eye jabs and flicks. Its just plain hard to hit the eye period (its a small target) and also your opponent can still get hit in the eye and be in the game. So, it doesnt give you much of an advantage. Just go for the stiff jab.

If anything I would say a groin kick is the best option before a clinch. And to me, in self defense apps, a groin kick should be put in to most of your combos. Most of the time its an open area, so why not? And it'll give you a good advantage over the guy, allowing you to dominate the clinch.

And for BJJ..I think its good to know, because we're talking about ground fighting here. However, I always keep in my that rolling around on the ground is something that I do not want to happen if I get into a fight. I'd much rather pin the guy down and start my ground & pound game. So I find the positioning game a lot more informative than the actual submissions.

_________________________
"you're going to work till you wish you were dead and then keep going.."
-Sgt Slaughter

In terms of the eye gouge here, what happens is that during the tie up as you go for the neck tie, you rake the eyes with the thumb on the way in. It's kind of on the way in as you go, so its like a "why not stop a moment and blind the guy on the way in", kind of thing.

As a tactic goes, it's "ok". You could use it to get a reaction, etc. But I'm still not all that sold on it. I'd rather go straight into dirty boxing and knees.

As far as groin kicks go, I don't like taking my feet off the ground for anything. If you're a great kicker, fine, if that's your thing. Me, no way do I want my feet off the ground a second (that said, I do work savate kicking).

As for BJJ, I am pretty much in agreement with IExcalibui2. In a fight, I'm not going for submissions. I'm going to keep position and strike. It's a more conservative and thus safer approach. Many times when you go for a submission on top, you sacrifice good position to do so. That means you're screwed if you don't sink it.

Chokes are another thing. If there was an opportunity to hit a choke I could see going for that.

You can just call me Arthur..I've been here long enough I guess? hahah (its only been 2 years but its felt so much longer than that...)

I mean, the eye gouge is "on the way" but 1) it doesn't sound like your motive is to take the guy's eye out, you're going for a clinch. So doesnt sound like you're committed to really jam that thumb to the back of the socket. Without that kind of mentality, just don't do it. 2) its still a small target to hit even if its along the way. Now blinding BOTH eyes would be a different story in my opinion....Maybe trying to rip the guy's ear off might be nice though?

John, I don't kick too often either. Most of my training is devoted to my hands (southern Kungfu right?) and I only end up using kicks if I tend to kickbox with another person. I don't like it because we're hitting each other like we're looking for points but I don't train for sport so I'm hardly in that arena where we're just tagging each other.

That said, I keep my kicks low and something like a groin kick appeals to me just because if you land the hit the pay out is 10x more effort than you put in. Other than that theres not much kicking.

oh Chokes are lovely. I would definitely go for a choke, as long as I'm not on the ground or in a vulnerable position. So if I was to choke someone out, I'd be on my feet. Bent over or standing straight, I'll be on my feet.

_________________________
"you're going to work till you wish you were dead and then keep going.."
-Sgt Slaughter

I mean, the eye gouge is "on the way" but 1) it doesn't sound like your motive is to take the guy's eye out, you're going for a clinch. So doesn’t sound like you're committed to really jam that thumb to the back of the socket. Without that kind of mentality, just don't do it. 2) its still a small target to hit even if its along the way. Now blinding BOTH eyes would be a different story in my opinion....Maybe trying to rip the guy's ear off might be nice though?

I see what you’re saying. I agree too. If my objective is to go “knuckle deep”, lol, I’m going to have that as my main priority and probably use that more as an opportunity to create space even, and not so much to clinch.

Besides, if you don’t get in quickly and establish good position, you run the risk of your clinch entry being countered by a more experienced wrestler. Part of the danger here actually lies in the manner in which you enter as well. Many people reach way too much without a good sense of timing or an appropriate set-up as well. I never like reaching away from my body too much (quick punching notwithstanding) unless its as a counter movement. When I clinch, I am moving my entire body into close range.

Quote:

John, I don't kick too often either. Most of my training is devoted to my hands (southern Kungfu right?) and I only end up using kicks if I tend to kickbox with another person. I don't like it because we're hitting each other like we're looking for points but I don't train for sport so I'm hardly in that arena where we're just tagging each other.

I tend to train out of an MMA context, though not really for “sport”, as it were. Thus sparring is a huge part of our training process. Sparring for us is often quite hard at times. Clinching and takedowns are allowed, so I’ve learned (as do my partners) about kicking. It’s not that difficult to catch the leg kicks and hit a quick takedown. Against the other types of kicks, its easy to avoid and close the distance and obtain the clinch (if the kicks aren’t set up well).

The thing about kicking is, if you’re going to train them for self-defense, you should train them within an MMA context which allows for takedowns and ground work. Folks would then learn how to throw them and set them up in such a context. This isn’t often the case, particularly within TKD where there is often, very little truly effective punching, very little effective clinch and ground.

Quote:That said, I keep my kicks low and something like a groin kick appeals to me just because if you land the hit the pay out is 10x more effort than you put in. Other than that theres not much kicking.

Do you use kicks to the groin in sparring? If so, what kind of cup are you wearing bro?

Quote:oh Chokes are lovely. I would definitely go for a choke, as long as I'm not on the ground or in a vulnerable position. So if I was to choke someone out, I'd be on my feet. Bent over or standing straight, I'll be on my feet.

Depending on the situation, I actually prefer to use a choke from the ground because I can better control my opponent there. However, in a street fight (which I never am involved in by the way), I’d not always commit myself to such an attack. It would completely depend on circumstances.

Quote:I tend to train out of an MMA context, though not really for “sport”, as it were. Thus sparring is a huge part of our training process. Sparring for us is often quite hard at times. Clinching and takedowns are allowed, so I’ve learned (as do my partners) about kicking. It’s not that difficult to catch the leg kicks and hit a quick takedown. Against the other types of kicks, its easy to avoid and close the distance and obtain the clinch (if the kicks aren’t set up well).

The thing about kicking is, if you’re going to train them for self-defense, you should train them within an MMA context which allows for takedowns and ground work. Folks would then learn how to throw them and set them up in such a context. This isn’t often the case, particularly within TKD where there is often, very little truly effective punching, very little effective clinch and ground.

Actually I do train it with MMA in mind (come on its JKD we're talking about here). Last time I sparred it was bare knuckle (well hand wraps) and anything goes, just don't be stupid. I found my partner just running around in circles like it was a sport match, which bothered me because, like I said, I don't enjoy running around tagging each other for points. So seeing as he didn't do anything I just decided to practice my high kicks on him (gave me a couple bruises on my shins).

Quote:Do you use kicks to the groin in sparring? If so, what kind of cup are you wearing bro?

No haven't kicked anybody in the groin in sparring or demonstrating. Usually I end up kicking the top inside of their thighs when I'm showing others a certain move or what not. As for sparring, we usually don't allow crotch shots.

_________________________
"you're going to work till you wish you were dead and then keep going.."
-Sgt Slaughter

I'm having trouble with taller opponents in trapping range. I'm 5'7, my friends 6'3 or 6'4 big mofo, I can straight blast him, but once I reach trapping range, I cant plum or neck tie him.

If I'm lucky enough I can run him down with the straight blast. Sometimes immediately after the blast, I give him a real hard shove to known him down. I suppose I can try take downs, but at the moment those are extremely hard for me right now. I haven't gotten to the point where I can take down my opponent without hurting myself in the process.

Um lets see, after I've done the blast on him, I've concluded with thigh kick, my kicks are fairly hard and that seems to work.

as for the tall opponent..I have the same problem. I'm 5'9 and my friend is like 6'3 too so its hard for me to get in. He also has a tactic to always keep running away so its hard for me to gain the inside. So I happen to end up playing a more distant game with him. Like I said, I just ended up throwing some strikes from the outside (playing tag) which I didnt like at all. I got a few good hits on his inside: a couple heavy shots to his chest and a nice chop to his neck.

But I learned that to gain the inside you might have to get hurt, same with takedowns. It might worth it to take a kick/punch and have him end up on the ground.

_________________________
"you're going to work till you wish you were dead and then keep going.."
-Sgt Slaughter

When we spar we do not run around. Since we are trying to emulate real life street fights or self defense situations, if my opponent ran from me, that would be great for me. I want to end the confrontation has quickly as possible so if he runs one way, I'm sprinting in the other direction.

But yea, I can understand how frustrating it must be when your sparring partner runs around on you. Makes it more of a sport rather than an actual altercation type scenario.

Quote:I'm having trouble with taller opponents in trapping range. I'm 5'7, my friends 6'3 or 6'4 big mofo, I can straight blast him, but once I reach trapping range, I cant plum or neck tie him.

I have a guy that is about 6'6". You aren't just going up and hit a plumm on guys like that, especially if they know how to bullneck. However, a knee shot might cause the taller folks to pike forward a bit,

Aside from the plumm (which I personally don't like that much), I'd try and hit an underhook on one side and with your shorter height (relative to him), you can then sag down on that arm and take away his mobility.

Another option is just to use your arms in a "double pillar" (both forearms straight up and down like you're going to ram something). Move straight inside until your arms are practically against his chest. From here you have the inside position (its a center position, just like the plumm presents). In that range, you can reach for the underhook on one side, the body lock, or just stay tight to him and work the inside tools (uppercuts/hooks followed by straights). Its really worth investigating the underhook however (body locks as well). You can knee from those positions as well as angle off and punch (moreso with the underhook).

Quote:

If I'm lucky enough I can run him down with the straight blast. Sometimes immediately after the blast, I give him a real hard shove to known him down. I suppose I can try take downs, but at the moment those are extremely hard for me right now. I haven't gotten to the point where I can take down my opponent without hurting myself in the process.

Um lets see, after I've done the blast on him, I've concluded with thigh kick, my kicks are fairly hard and that seems to work.

I need more options, I cant use HKE's on him if I can't clinch him.

Anyone have suggestions?

Work on your clinch a lot more. All you need to do is to develop other positions aside from the plumm. Specifically the underhook. Like anything else, it takes time to learn the intricasies, yet completely worth the time you spend. Investigate the concept of "dirty boxing" and work on your in-fighting. That would be my advice. What I've found is that the more you work on your stand-up (outside and inside ranges), the more this will facilitate your clinch game.

Play and have fun. Thats what all this is about anyway. Enjoy yourself and branch out. Constantly push yourself to learn different approaches (though I'm sure this does not need to be said).

Quote:But yea, I can understand how frustrating it must be when your sparring partner runs around on you. Makes it more of a sport rather than an actual altercation type scenario.

yea...I was completely frustrated because he knows I'm not training for sport while his training is geared towards sport. And he only tried 3 moves on me, while the whole time I'm pressing the match. 1 was a stiff jab that caught me good. The other 2 was when he caught my kick & tried for a sweep, neither of them worked because I just jumped at him. 1st sweep, I didnt know what I was thinking, but I tried to jump up in the air and kick him in the head (some movie stuff lol). Distance was off so I kinda ran into him and we separated. 2nd time I wanted to grab his head but he backed away from that so I ended up chopping him in the neck. Other than that it was a whole lot of moving in circles...I guess it was some good practice in terms of footwork

_________________________
"you're going to work till you wish you were dead and then keep going.."
-Sgt Slaughter

Ok, I have to ask a few questions (curiosity has been piqued and I am only asking to play devil‘s advocate). I am always curious about how folks view the sport vs. street distinctions so that's why I'm drifting here slightly....(if you all would rather us start another thread, thats cool)

IExcalibui2 wrote

Quote:

yea...I was completely frustrated because he knows I'm not training for sport while his training is geared towards sport.

What is different about his approach that gears it more toward sport? What specific strategy or tactic does he use that gives you that impression?

Quote:And he only tried 3 moves on me, while the whole time I'm pressing the match. 1 was a stiff jab that caught me good.

I'm curious. Isn't the conservative approach something that isn't altogether a bad idea in the street? I'm asking because I teach guys to stay disciplined and lead with the jab while creating angles and maintaining range. Sounds to me like he was doing the same thing.

Quote:

The other 2 was when he caught my kick & tried for a sweep, neither of them worked because I just jumped at him. 1st sweep, I didnt know what I was thinking, but I tried to jump up in the air and kick him in the head (some movie stuff lol). Distance was off so I kinda ran into him and we separated.

I realize that you were playing around here, but why did you take that approach if you're into a "street" approach?

Quote:

2nd time I wanted to grab his head but he backed away from that so I ended up chopping him in the neck. Other than that it was a whole lot of moving in circles...I guess it was some good practice in terms of footwork

Yeah, I believe footwork is of paramount importance. But I was curious to know why you thought his use of footwork, staying well outside and being non-committal was tantamount to a "sport" mentality. Not starting [censored] mind you, just generally curious.

Quote:What is different about his approach that gears it more toward sport? What specific strategy or tactic does he use that gives you that impression?

well if your in a ring/controlled arena you have the liberty to run & dance around to get your space. You get to pick and choose what you want to work off of.

In an uncontrolled arena, and assuming your in the fight, then your opponent and/or you are probably going to try and take each others heads off as quick as possible. To me there isnt much "running" around because if there was I'd just run to the cops then. But if you been in a fight then you'd know thats probably not what happens. The guy throws a punch and some how gives you an opening somewhere (or you create one) then you make him pay for making a mistake, and also for fighting with you. BAM* the fight is over, no dancing.

Aside from the running part, I've been to the class that he takes (San Shou/San Da) and the instructor there has a very sport approach compared to the previous one. They don't really go over self defense as much as sport San Shou Kickboxing. The previous instructor focused on both ring and self defense. I know both of the instructors so I can kind of feel the vibe in the air. This friend that we're talking about agreess with me as well.

Quote:I'm curious. Isn't the conservative approach something that isn't altogether a bad idea in the street? I'm asking because I teach guys to stay disciplined and lead with the jab while creating angles and maintaining range. Sounds to me like he was doing the same thing.

Yes maintaining a comfortable range for yourself and creating angles is good. What you said is overall good advice and habit building for any kind of fight.

But like I said, if you're in a fight then you're going to fight. I'm a pretty peaceful person so if a guy gives me THAT much room and space then I'd find a way to just stop the fight. Hes not fighting me, I'm not fighting him. Whats the point? If you want to fight me then fight.

Quote:I realize that you were playing around here, but why did you take that approach if you're into a "street" approach?

well I can't really say why I even tried a move like that. I just reacted & tried to kick him in the head. Most likely because my 1st kick was aimed towards his head, so I guess I tried to seal the deal. But I really can't say why, it just happened. I just know I wanted to continue to press the attack.

Also I kind of gave up that street approach after he started running everywhere. I just said F it and kind of just kickboxed with him.

Quote:Yeah, I believe footwork is of paramount importance. But I was curious to know why you thought his use of footwork, staying well outside and being non-committal was tantamount to a "sport" mentality. Not starting [censored] mind you, just generally curious.

hahah its okay, I welcome discussion

IMO, in sports you have lots of time to think, strategize, feel your opponent out, etc etc. But if you were to get in a real fight, the guy doesn't want to feel anything but his knuckles cracking your skull. Hes going to come at you head on arms swinging. Theres also not a lot of time either (unless your setting up a street fight) so you have to act instantly. Also you don't have 3,5 rounds to KO/submit/etc the guy. You have to do then and there for your safety & sometimes theirs.

_________________________
"you're going to work till you wish you were dead and then keep going.."
-Sgt Slaughter

"Sport training" doesn't take into consideration rough terrain, debris, low light situations, no ref or rules, a lot of the techniques used in sport fighting leaves you wide open for dirty tactics, multiple attackers (obviously you're nearly screwed in those situations but you usually have the chance to at least escape alive with the right training or else soldiers wouldn't train to deal with that stuff), suprise attacks, large gloves, etc.

_________________________
Member of DaJoGen MMA school under Dave Hagen and Team Chaos fight team under Denver Mangiyatan and Chris Toquero, ran out of Zanshin Martial Arts in Salem Oregon: http://www.zanshinarts.org/Home.aspx,

Quote:"Sport training" doesn't take into consideration rough terrain, debris, low light situations, no ref or rules, a lot of the techniques used in sport fighting leaves you wide open for dirty tactics, multiple attackers (obviously you're nearly screwed in those situations but you usually have the chance to at least escape alive with the right training or else soldiers wouldn't train to deal with that stuff), suprise attacks, large gloves, etc.

Let me start with Stormy's here. Lets see where we can agree...

Can we say that training for "sport" is; gearing your training toward a specific event and it's unique rules structure? Expanding upon this, I've seen guys (in the past) from Pride fighting in the UFC. The two have different rules structures. Kneeing from the ground was legal in Pride (correct me if I'm wrong...I've not see that many Pride events) and it isn't in the UFC. So what happened was, a guy was called for an illegal knee/kicking the other man while down.

That illustrates what happens when you train for a specific rules structure for one place that's different in another. Of course the opposite can be true, where you DON'T prepare for something allowed and miss the opportunities to either execute it yourself, or in your unpreparedness, you get hit by something you weren't anticipating (which I believe is the angle many people take when they discuss "sport" fighting).

Now you bring up such issues as terrain, debris, low light, etc., all of which are valid. These are environmental factors. These are IMO, easily overcome and prepared for through standard training (which is a good topic for debate by itself). I believe that standard training in an environmentally friendly atmosphere, can prepare you for an environmentally UNFRIENDLY atmosphere. The reason? Because although situations may change (environment, etc), delivery systems do NOT change. Thus, to the person who has the developed delivery system(s), the environmental factores are merely "details".

In terms of dirty tactics; the delivery system argument remains unchanged. The reason; because "dirt" is a cheap substitute for skill, which again goes back to the subject of delivery systems. People with functional delivery systems will simply be at a higher level of skill than the person without. While not downplaying "foul tactics" (because a finger burried knuckle deep is a situation), they are still only a detail. If the person applying the foul tactic (or attempting to is the better word) can't match skill with his opponent, it's a moot point. If the skill level is higher, its overkill.

The topic of gloves is also moot in most cases. Gloves simply allow people to train at higher intensities. Substituting smaller MMA gloves can replicate a street encounter easily. Not a biggie here at all.

Multiple opponents are bad news. Weapons even the playing field, unless they are armed too and aiming at you. You might then ask yourself what you did to pi$$ off an entire group of people (serious soul searching would be advisable).

Bottom line is, you can't prepare for everything. What you CAN do is develop your game to the highest level, then if you wanted to, go train on asphalt, on bare ground, on ice, in a swimming pool, an elevator, a stairwell, in the dark, with no clothes on. Me? I'll train hard and take my chances. I have to much going on to worry about every possible way in which I might encounter someone training to hit me in the face.

I suppose the question to ask is; what are we preparing for? Next is; what are we most worried about? I personally am not worried about being attacked by a guy wearing a swim ring (inner tube) in a pool, so I don't train for that.

...Of course I train for being attacked by MULTIPLE guys in swim rings

True points, I mostly agress except that I think a person should consider the situations they may find themselves in and the environments and take some time to learn what is necessary to adapt, how their standard methods may need to be modified and train "alive" in those situtations. Not base your entire training program on all the oddball situations and focus on the primary thing (delivery system and attributes) but have that as a piece of their training. Pride fighters trained for their rules and situtations and ufc fighters trained for theirs. The basics remain the same basically but they see the need to adapt to different situations and adapt depending on the details that they knew were likely to come up so why shouldn't we? It's the same in the military, the basic concepts are the same and the techniques start the same, but depending on where you're going and what situations you're going to face you adapt your training while remembering the basics. For example urban warfare vs. woodland combat utilize the exact same principles of shooting technique and leadership principles are the same, etc. but the tactics have to be modified for the different environments and enemies. They dont train for "every" situation just what they are likely to face. Going back to the military shooting analogy in bootcamp you learn the basic stances, and principles of accurate shooting and they remain the same no matter what but how you apply them in a unit can change, how the unit will move through an area changes, stances might change, etc. but the core is the same. The basic skills you learn are taken in slightly different directions but the core is always there and always trained.

Edited by Stormdragon (08/02/0809:11 PM)

_________________________
Member of DaJoGen MMA school under Dave Hagen and Team Chaos fight team under Denver Mangiyatan and Chris Toquero, ran out of Zanshin Martial Arts in Salem Oregon: http://www.zanshinarts.org/Home.aspx,

I like using my grip as well. Its an integral part of what we do. I just like isolating certain aspects of certain games. Like boxing for example. I really enjoy throwing on the big gloves and airing it out. Even when going with less intensity, we still push through with body weight (its good to conserve brain cells when possible). Those big gloves allow more realism when trading.

Of course you can do the same things with MMA gloves, but you're still going to pay when you go harder. There's no avoiding that. You can throw on the headgear, but there is evidence to suggest the headgear won't stop brain trauma - it just prevents cutting.

Regardless, I definitely believe that you're not getting a complete picture if all you do is train with big gloves. The mma training gloves are pricey, but the pair I have from combatsports.com have lasted me three years now and going. Not bad.

Quote:True points, I mostly agress except that I think a person should consider the situations they may find themselves in .....

I have no problem with this at all. I just have to wonder to what extent we have to go as civilians? How hard-core does a person have to be outside of training that is in itself, fairly hard-core? Consider most adults who have responsibilities outside of the gym?

Speaking only for me, my life is pretty busy and hectic, as are most folks who work, have a family, care for aging parents, etc. Somewhere in there you find the time for training on TOP of everything else. I suppose I could take on the extra load of doing "SWAT" training, but I honestly....and...sincerely...don't see the real benefit. Its easier to make intelligent life decisions than to be paranoid and train for every contingency.

Now if you're in law enforcement or the armed forces, that's another issue entirely. But...those guys carry weapons. Lets not forget we are talking about "martial arts" here.

Quote:

Pride fighters trained for their rules and situtations and ufc fighters trained for theirs. The basics remain the same basically but they see the need to adapt to different situations and adapt depending on the details that they knew were likely to come up so why shouldn't we?

Again, I can't speak for you or anyone else here...but I've already done this, just as have so many others already training MMA style. I don't know about where you train, but the only rules in MY gym is to take care of our training partners. Other than that, there are no rules. As well, we train for every range. Ocassionally we even throw in some knife work. I honestly don't know what else we're supposed to do. I already know how to run...so that big part of my self defense training is already a part of me. HAS been for some time.

Quote:

It's the same in the military, the basic concepts are the same and the techniques start the same, but depending on where you're going and what situations you're going to face you adapt your training while remembering the basics.

Hows that apply to civilian life that isn't covered by basic awareness of your surroundings?

Quote:

For example urban warfare vs. woodland combat utilize the exact same principles of shooting technique and leadership principles are the same, etc. but the tactics have to be modified for the different environments and enemies. They dont train for "every" situation just what they are likely to face.

I understand that. But how does that apply to me running down to the 7-ll for a slurpy?

Quote:

Going back to the military shooting analogy in bootcamp you learn the basic stances, and principles of accurate shooting and they remain the same no matter what but how you apply them in a unit can change, how the unit will move through an area changes, stances might change, etc. but the core is the same. The basic skills you learn are taken in slightly different directions but the core is always there and always trained.

Tell that to the working stiff in the Geo Metro with three kids in the back whining about the fast food joint getting the gender wrong for their happy meal toys. I think its important that we zoom in out of "Rambo mode" a minute and remember that civilian life is a far cry from the green berets roaming around in the bush. If you want to put cammo on and paint your face, go out in the dark and train tactically, great. Maybe you've got more time than me. Won't matter worth a turd in a punchbowl if you can't simply fight on a level playing field to begin with. Toys are great. Games are fun. Taking ourselves WAY too seriously tends to have a strong effect on our egos and makes us feel like we're really "doing something".

At some point, there are just other things I'd rather be doing than putting ninja suits on and trying to see how long I can stay "invisible". But that's just me.....

Quote: Tell that to the working stiff in the Geo Metro with three kids in the back

Is it even possible to have 3 kids in the back of a Geo metro? Their faces must be paced to the hatchback window.

Quote: there are just other things I'd rather be doing than putting ninja suits on and trying to see how long I can stay "invisible".

Don't knock it till you try it

Okay so instead of trying to clinch my 6'3 friend, I went from straight blast into dirty boxing. I must have gone low because I elbowed his upper thigh and he instantly dropped complaining about a dead leg or charley horse. I should work on underhooks and takedowns.

John

I know your not big on self perfection skills known as chi sao, subrada, and hubud. But for a beginner, how important do you think these self perfection skills are?

It is my understanding that working these skills help develop attributes.

Coupled with weapons training, you can increase your attributes and the crisp or your techniques.

For example, knife and stick training helps improve your body mechanics. Which can transpose to empty hand fighting. Do you agree?

Also how often do you do that wrestlers self perfection drill, the one where they bump shoulders practicing for underhook positions? Its common to see all MMA fighters with wrestling skills practice this drill prior to their fight.

Is it even possible to have 3 kids in the back of a Geo metro? Their faces must be paced to the hatchback window.

You're gettin' the picture!

Quote:

Okay so instead of trying to clinch my 6'3 friend, I went from straight blast into dirty boxing. I must have gone low because I elbowed his upper thigh and he instantly dropped complaining about a dead leg or charley horse. I should work on underhooks and takedowns.

Thats REAL dirty boxing. But that's cool too. Just continue to research that and you'll be fine. Dirty boxing for many folks is the SINGLE neck tie. Check out the fight between Randy Couture and Vitor Belfort way back in UFC 17 (or something like that). Randy puts on a Dirty Boxing CLINIC in that fight.

Quote:

I know your not big on self perfection skills known as chi sao, subrada, and hubud. But for a beginner, how important do you think these self perfection skills are?

I don't mind the notion of self-perfection drills. But I do think you can run into problems doing some drills. Hubud is a BIG no-no for me particularly because of how far the elbows tend to come away from the body. That's why I don't really care for chi-sao and all the others. What you want to be doing for drilling is PUMMELING. Head pummeling, wrist pummeling (aka, "hand fighting") neck pummeling and body pummeling. Even LEG pummeling when playing guard bottom. These are things that will have more of a direct translation to the fight game. Some stick drills, I don't have a problem with. Empty hand to me however is different. Beginner/advanced status; makes no differences. Beginners can pummel just like the pros. Just take things slow; speed wise and pace of learning. This is not a race. Take your time and enjoy the journey remembering that there IS no real destination.

Quote:

It is my understanding that working these skills help develop attributes.

What working some of these things will do is create bad habits. Elbows away from the body = bad juju! Hubud is bad about lifting the elbows high at points, not something you want to do at that range.

Quote:Coupled with weapons training, you can increase your attributes and the crisp or your techniques.

I don't think there is anything wrong with weapons training. Knife sparring will help (and it's fun). I like empty hand vs. knife sparring. Now THAT will get you somewhere! I have a unique drill for this scenario: I'll have one guy keep a knife in his waist band (training knife, folks). Then I have both guys start pummeling in the clinch. At some random point, the guy with the knife will attempt to draw in and "stab" his partner. The partner tries to develop a feel for that and pick the draw up when this occurs, or, deals with it from the point of having been "cut/stabbed". It's a great drill for developing sensitivity. You can play this game with your eyes closed or open as well for more fun (which if you want good sensitivity in the clinch/"trapping" range, you'll learn to pummel, then do so with your eyes both opened and closed at random times).

I think they certainly have their places in the scope of training. I use quite a bit of Filipino footwork in my empty hand boxing game. I also see many of the same entries and maneuvers playing out in the empty hand at times.

Quote:

Also how often do you do that wrestlers self perfection drill, the one where they bump shoulders practicing for underhook positions? Its common to see all MMA fighters with wrestling skills practice this drill prior to their fight.

Yep, that's the pummeling (Swim drill) I was referring to earlier in this post (body pummeling). That is something we do in vitrually every clinch session we work on. Combined with the others (head, neck, hand, leg) you really develop some great attributes for true fighting application. That drill is great for your upper body wresting (there are a lot of attacks from that over-under position). And while that's a "deep" clinch (you're very committed to your opponent), it has to be mastered, just because that kind of clinch is so common in real fights.

I don't think theres a need for constant training of different environments. Drills here & there for certain scenarios are helpful. But no need to train in a bar scene all the time. You have the body mechanics & reaction from just regular training so continue to build that up from your regular training. Maybe using the scenarios as tests would be a good idea.

As far as pummeling goes, I think much of Chinese MA develops sensitivity through their drills. It may not be body to body all the time (WC's Chi Sao drill) but it can be since trapping & clinch range are almost the same. These perfection drills helps to develop precise skill in the sensitivity department. Once you develop your bridge (connection) to the other guy you can feel out much of what they're doing. But these drills do have their place & limitations. They're designed to train a certain skill set, not all. So if you're smart enough you'd take those skills from the drill & then apply it. Bring in the aliveness! Unfortunately not all people realize this....

Btw I don't think elbows should be too close to the body. Makes you closed up and also more movement required when you want to lash your arms/hands out. Think of all the movement you would need if you wanted to elbow a person too. Elbow travels from your side all the way up to proper position for the hit & then to your target. Thats coming from bottom to the top & then across. If your elbows were a bit higher and out, you cut the distance by a little. Muay Thai fighters throw elbows out as fast as jabs because the weapon is out & ready to be used. Someone that stands like Mike Tyson would take a bit longer to elbow a person.

_________________________
"you're going to work till you wish you were dead and then keep going.."
-Sgt Slaughter

Eh I just like training in different environments and "scenarios" that I'll likely face as well as the standard "sport" (for lack of a better word) ones while focusing on applying my core "game" in each situation just with modifications. I feel that is a good way to learn how to adapt quick to varying conditions. Of course coming from a more of a military mindset, and considering I'll probably go into Law enforcement, it makes some sense. Plus I have the free time at the moment. When I was approaching my training that way a couple years ago I felt I was overall somewhat better (lately it's been mostly mma style training, when I can find partners).For me it's like krav maga meets MMA. I think most RBSD programs have some good ideas but are pretty shaky on the fundamentals or their "game".

_________________________
Member of DaJoGen MMA school under Dave Hagen and Team Chaos fight team under Denver Mangiyatan and Chris Toquero, ran out of Zanshin Martial Arts in Salem Oregon: http://www.zanshinarts.org/Home.aspx,

Okay so I've been working on my 1 hand neck clinch...gotta admit not to shabby. Really opens up the for KNE's and the transitions aren't so difficult to learn. Practice is killer on the neck though, even more so than the thai clinch.

So the subject today is dirty tricks. The R.A.T system places an emphasis on eyes, throat, and groin attacks. The reason Vunaks gives is that anyone can be a good boxer, good kick boxer, wrestler, jiu-jitsu practitioner so and so worth. no matter how much you train there will always be someone better. Using these dirty tricks allows you to borrow those small moments of pain that incapacitates the attacker in order for you to easily take control.

This is yet another example of why he blended kino mutai with bjj. I can be an exceptional grappler, but there could always be one just as good out there or better. And if I need to defeat this guy in a hurry, isn't it best for me to apply my most deadliest attacks in order to get through this guy? In order for me to get away, or go after the next guy?

A reminder kino mutai would be the art of un-interrupted biting and eye gouging. Vu says whats required is a good base and the understanding of grips. Also the kind of bites and the best places to bite. The approach depending on your position is to bite your attacker, without him being able to bite you. The idea being that once you begin to knaw on your opponents flesh, he will instantly want to pull away. Here is where your grips are applied, this keeps him from pull back and ending your bite. Three to eight seconds later when you release the grip and the bite, your opponent will pull back and you can then stand on your feet or continue to a dominant position.

Also another question. I've been looking at youtube videos of JKD guys. What up with all the Bruce Lee imitators. Is it me or does everyone strike, traps, strike, trap. Every youtube I see the instructor is back handing and covering just incase he may or may not have to trap Its like reference point fighting 101. It's like they seen Bruce's movies and assume that pac sao is a mandatory part of the attack. And not one of these guys clinch...ever.

Also I got some questions regarding Matt Thorton and Paul Vunak in terms of how they approach street fighting. I have Thrtnons FJKD2-3 series. Haven't gotten around to watching them because it seems like is more jiu-jitsu. I've only checked him out on youtube though, he doesn't emphasize those dirty tricks I was talking about above. Seems to me he is more about competition.

Okay so I've been working on my 1 hand neck clinch.............Practice is killer on the neck though, even more so than the thai clinch.

Killer as in, its tough on stamina, or did you mean in another way? Keep your neck stiff and bring your shoulders up some to make your neck like a turtle. You will probably see that its tougher to keep a neck tie that way or for your partner to keep one on you. You then have to adjust the angle. Many people will tell you that you have to avoid a squared up stance directly in front of you, saying it's better to create an angle. And you definitely want to do that. However, if you have a good neck tie and “crank” it properly, you can stand more in front of him with less “risk”. Just be busy with your free hand. Standing square with your opponent ear to ear is considered bad wrestling. Of course, uppercuts to the face would be considered bad wrestling as well, lol. Developing a good neck tie definitely takes time. Learning the feel, making refinements in control and all isn't something you do over a weekend obviously. With practice, you'll start to really polish that position to where you feel comfortable.

Quote:

So the subject today is dirty tricks. The R.A.T system places an emphasis on eyes, throat, and groin attacks. The reason Vunak gives is that anyone can be a good boxer, good kick boxer, wrestler, jiu-jitsu practitioner so and so worth. no matter how much you train there will always be someone better. Using these dirty tricks allows you to borrow those small moments of pain that incapacitates the attacker in order for you to easily take control.

I follow the line of reasoning, but there's something we should try and flesh out a bit. If we work here from the perspective that our opponent is simply "better" than we are, then it follows that no tactics we have are working for us. This will take some explaining perhaps. Using only logic here; if our opponent is that much better, are tactics are going to fall short regardless of whether they are "dirty" or not. "Dirt", just like any other, "clean" technique, requires skill in application -- skill that is based on delivery systems. If you have weapons, they must always spring forth by way of some delivery system. THAT is the main message that I've been speaking of for years on this forum. The delivery system is more important than the tactics used.

Think of it like this; tactics are like bullets, delivery systems are guns. Without a good gun (delivery system), you might as well be just picking up bullets and throwing them at an opponent. Foul/tactics or dirty tactics are no different than any OTHER tactic when looked at from that perspective. There must always be a sound delivery system in place from which to execute ANY tactic, "dirty" or otherwise.

That said, it then doesn't matter what tactics/techniques you use. Powerful tactics backed up by solid execution (skill in delivery systems) are going to be effective. Some may use the eye jab, some may prefer a boxing jab. Both have their respective places (and times). In the end, it's about what you and I can actually do that matters.

One last point....if a person is better (better delivery system), foul tactics aren't going to even the playing field, in my opinion. That seems to be the primary implication being made by certain groups (and again, I am a PFS instructor) The notion is that somehow, foul tactics/dirty fighting evens the score against "more skilled" individuals. The thing is, those individuals are more skilled for a reason. They will actually have the better platform for applying foul tactics than the less skilled individual, again, just as with any other technique. I think this is common sense.

I think needs to be addressed is the use of foul tactics in their appropriate places and what our primary objectives should be for them. When/where/why/how. Again, I'm not against their use. I just believe we need to be completely honest in any of these discussions in an attempt to bring the truth (in combat) out in the open.

Quote:

This is yet another example of why he blended kino mutai with bjj. I can be an exceptional grappler, but there could always be one just as good out there or better. And if I need to defeat this guy in a hurry, isn't it best for me to apply my most deadliest attacks in order to get through this guy? In order for me to get away, or go after the next guy?

I would only say that, if your opponent is a better grappler (ie, a more well-developed delivery system), the point here is virtually moot. We have to create hypothetical situations to illustrate the point. Thus, if I happened to run into a superior grappler, what exactly does that mean? What situations will arise when this occurs? For instance, how will I know when I have managed to encounter a superior grappler? Probably because he managed to take me down, right? If he was able to take me down, its probably safe to assume that he's in a dominant position. From that perspective, I probably won't be able to bite or eye gouge effectively, whereas my opponent would be able to (particularly if I attempted to do so, reminding him of what he could do to me). In this situation, we need a functional ground fighting delivery system in order to be able to escape and regain our footing.

Or....perhaps we've encountered someone who is a better grappler, but hasn't managed to take us down yet. In this case, we could use good footwork and the lead jab to create distance and keep him away. This is exactly what I would do in just about ANY self-defense situation. Here I think the boxing jab is better than the eye jab because it has more on it. The larger striking surface means less chance of missing the intended target (which becomes larger itself by default).

Now I understand the points about foul tactics (and believe me, I've seen Vunak demonstrate this as well as his top instructors) and again, I'm not saying that these have no utility. Without skill in application and from a functional delivery system, they're useless as would be any other tactic. You may get the feeling that I'm against them because of everything I've been saying, but that isn't the case at all. I'm just big on the development of skill in the core fundamentals (they're fundamental for a reason).

Quote:

A reminder kino mutai would be the art of un-interrupted biting and eye gouging. Vu says whats required is a good base and the understanding of grips. Also the kind of bites and the best places to bite. The approach depending on your position is to bite your attacker, without him being able to bite you. The idea being that once you begin to knaw on your opponents flesh, he will instantly want to pull away. Here is where your grips are applied, this keeps him from pull back and ending your bite. Three to eight seconds later when you release the grip and the bite, your opponent will pull back and you can then stand on your feet or continue to a dominant position.

One thing about it however, is that to DO so requires skill. More skill in fact than your attacker. It takes skill to get into these positions. Basic skill, but skill nonetheless. But to be honest, I'm not all that into biting people. I can't think of one situation in which biting would be an attractive option. Not one. I don't care if I'm lying under someone. I mean, if that's the case, there's a reason I'm there...and that's because they're better than me. I'm loathe to bite folks better than me when I'm in inferior positions. Besides, I don't want some guy's blood in my mouth.

Quote:

Also another question. I've been looking at youtube videos of JKD guys. What up with all the Bruce Lee imitators. Is it me or does everyone strike, traps, strike, trap. Every youtube I see the instructor is back handing and covering just incase he may or may not have to trap Its like reference point fighting 101. It's like they seen Bruce's movies and assume that pac sao is a mandatory part of the attack. And not one of these guys clinch...ever.

[censored] like that really shows a lack of actual resistance in training, more or less. Much of what I've seen guys do (and have done myself way back) never comes out in any actual sparring (against functional people). And by resistance, I don't mean negative resistance, but positive resistance. The resistance and intensity can be the same in both cases (positive or negative, but there is a general helpful attitude with positive resistance in training. It's team oriented and builds the tribe instead of demolishing it. Big difference, imo.

Quote:

Also I got some questions regarding Matt Thornton and Paul Vunak in terms of how they approach street fighting. I have Thrtnons FJKD2-3 series. Haven't gotten around to watching them because it seems like is more jiu-jitsu. I've only checked him out on youtube though, he doesn't emphasize those dirty tricks I was talking about above. Seems to me he is more about competition.

A word about the SBG series. The FJKD series 1 was great for what it was. I still think its great. I have it on VHS and am looking for the DVD format at some point (though that would be going "backward"). FJKD2was/is great. Another step forward and demonstrated the basic delivery systems and what folks needed to know for each; particularly with regard to the clinch and ground disks. FJKD3 was more along the lines of the delivery systems with regard to the art of BJJ and vale tudo. In some ways, you could make a case that the third set (and in some ways, the second as well) was geared more toward the competitive side.

That said, Thornton has always maintained that it is through the sportive approach, that the delivery systems are built. The delivery systems are those things which make us functional as fighters, for sport OR self-defense. Lets not forget that true self-defense is far and away easier than sport fighting!

And I say its easier in terms of execution and application. This has nothing whatsoever to do with the higher stakes involved in street fighting (obviously the stakes are always higher in a self-defense situation). However, those fights are typically FAR "easier". And that's the benefit of such training.

A few more points.

To reiterate, I'm not against foul tactics. I'm for skill. I'm not for grappling in every situation. I'm for taking any fight into an area where I have an advantage that my opponent does not have. Real fights can involve weapons and multiple attackers. Sport fights do not. Thus I mind my p's and q's when I'm out and about. I make friends, not enemies. I'd rather buy someone a beer than break a bottle of beer over his head. Life is easier that way. I pick my battles carefully, choosing to win the war overall (isn't the objective of war, eventual peace, after all is said and done?).

So, I train the three core, delivery systems (stand-up/clinch/ground). Thus I'm boxing, wrestling in the clinch and grappling on the ground. The very act of training runs contrary to self-defense (which is about avoiding conflict and escape when possible), but that's the paradox isn't it? I know the better I get at fighting, the better I will become at self-defense. I think that makes perfect sense, but it isn't necessarily a given (case in point being, Alex Gong, a great fighter who apparently had horribly instincts for self-preservation).

You know, I don't know if this post answered any questions. If so, great. But I think the point is more about keeping the conversation going. Doing that will eventually yield a deeper understanding of what we're both talking about. So keep it going!

Im fairly new to clinch work too and,yea its can be a killer on the neck, I find it too.I hate my neck being ''jerked'' over and over.A great thing to do but not receive.I was given a tip to use a towel to do pull ups with as it gives you a similar grip and positioning to how you would be clinching and gets you into the idea to not just pull with your arms but hang off their neck using your body weight.

Anyone got any good sensible neck strengthening excersises that wont kill the neck later in life?I guess the best conditioning is actualy doing the clinching though there isnt always a person about to work with.

Is the single neck a tactic best used for just adding the striking side eg dirty boxing, or can it also lead well to other things like a takedown?

I was told to kind of resemble a gorilla haha.This positioning helping to facilitate the idea of hanging off the neck and not just pulling with the arms as well as helping other things I cant remember well at the minute...Body slightly curved ,shoulders turtled necked, keeping on the toes.Always ready to move or burst into a seperation and pull and knee.To try to be the contoller of the seperation.Kind of hard to explain....but the over all tip was think gorilla.Not fixed in the position as things change in seconds and nothings still....just generaly gorilla.Turtles and gorillas.The zoo forums that way>Maybe im thinking of the pummeling.

_________________________
I point my saxaphone at the rare Booted Gorilla.

Quote:Im fairly new to clinch work too and,yea its can be a killer on the neck, I find it too.I hate my neck being ''jerked'' over and over.A great thing to do but not receive.I was given a tip to use a towel to do pull ups with as it gives you a similar grip and positioning to how you would be clinching and gets you into the idea to not just pull with your arms but hang off their neck using your body weight.

The best thing to do is keep good position. Kind of like how Vu tells folks folks to keep their neck stiff and look up when they are practicing headbutts. The thing to do is pull your neck in like a turtle and look straight ahead whenever someone grabs your neck.

Either that or if you are caught in bad position, don't resist so much straight backward. Besides that being a great set-up for a double leg, you'll just wear yourself down. Learn to counter it and you'll be out sooner (then you won't have to worry about it).

If you're training your partners, just don't resist backward that much. Stay "turtled" but relaxed, even if you're training them and are "broken down" slightly. It does get easier.

Quote:

Anyone got any good sensible neck strengthening excersises that wont kill the neck later in life?I guess the best conditioning is actualy doing the clinching though there isnt always a person about to work with.

You could get a neck harness that holds a dumbbell. Start light needless to say.

Quote:

Is the single neck a tactic best used for just adding the striking side eg dirty boxing, or can it also lead well to other things like a takedown?

It can definitely lead to takedowns. The "knee-pick" is a great one that can be had from there. Ankle picks, the double leg, snap-down to front headlock are all good from that position.

I will modify the position frequently by taking the neck tying hand and getting an underhook with my opposite, free arm. Then I join hands into a reverse headlock position (aka, "pinch" headlock) position. That's a great position for firing knees as well as hitting takedowns. You can hit a duck-under from there and have it lead straight into an arm triangle choke. One easy move from there is just to "twist" your opponent down. You have to step in deep between his feet from that position and simply take your neck tie elbow straight to the mat. Your body will be turning as you do to twist him down. It's quite effective.

You can create an angle and change level to hit the single and double leg takedowns. Much of what I do however works off more upper body/Greco-Roman wrestling where I believe the takedowns are "safer" (than having to change level and "shoot").

I believe that its well within reason to functionalize the "RAT" approach. So all of this stuff that I've been into since my PFS days has only reinforced the concept. Instead of disproving it and making all the PFS stuff seem like garbage, it definitely holds water from a conceptual point of view. I am still seeing applications all the time throughout training.

In fact, the RAT would be the difference between MMA for "sport" and MMA for "self-defense. Technically speaking, there isn't much difference. The main difference is one of strategy. I don't think Vunak would disagree with that at all.

I am sure I saw you write that being ear to ear is bad wrestling and was wondering you could clarify that and expand on it.I looked for which post it was in after some time but have lost it.I ask because I thought it was good to go to one side or the other to takedown go for a takedown and not go straight in the middle.Also I saw a whole DVD available by a Sambo guy on the 'Russian 2 on 1 'and know that STAB by Karl Tanswell from clips iv seen uses it.Iv done a bit on it and it seems an important thing to know.Any other good sources or tips and tactics on it?

Also do you know of Jim Mccann's material?Is it all it claims?I saw one being praised as the best 'street grappling' DVD.It had the usual 'beat street attacks and trained athlete' quotes.

Edited by matxtx (09/13/0805:54 PM)

_________________________
I point my saxaphone at the rare Booted Gorilla.

Quote:I am sure I saw you write that being ear to ear is bad wrestling and was wondering you could clarify that and expand on it.

Ear to ear is essentially a 50-50, neutral position. And while that happens a lot (and is going to happen), it's important to strive for a dominant position in the tie-up/clinch. This means that we should always try and establish dominant head position first. This means driving the head into the "pocket" (TMJ/jawline/neck). Its the same principle as a cross-face essentially. That helps to create a dominant angle in which ear to ear wrestling isn't going to do.

If you're tying up face to face, instead of going deeper into an ear to ear tie-up, you should be going forehead-to-forehead and working to drive into the pocket on one side, creating that superior angle. The forward pressure will assist that as well as possibly set up a snap-down situation.

The benefit of developing this skill (driving head position) is you learn to use your head as a weapon as well as another limb. In a real fight in close, this becomes your headbutt (though you're not "snapping" it) as well the dominant position enabler. Lets face it, real fights are all about superior angles and positions (angles being nothing but relative positions). Thus who controls position, controls a fight. Obviously then, who controls a fight is going to be one who (in most cases) "wins" the fight.

Quote:

I looked for which post it was in after some time but have lost it.I ask because I thought it was good to go to one side or the other to takedown go for a takedown and not go straight in the middle.

Yes. If I am going for a takedown, its always better for me if I can gain the angle to one side.

Quote:

Also I saw a whole DVD available by a Sambo guy on the 'Russian 2 on 1 'and know that STAB by Karl Tanswell from clips iv seen uses it.Iv done a bit on it and it seems an important thing to know.Any other good sources or tips and tactics on it?

The best thing to do is learn the fundamental mechanics of the 2 on 1, grab a partner and just practice moving him around with it. I swear to you, doing that for a year will answer more questions for you than virtually anything else. Just "playing the game" (regardless of what that game is) will do wonders for your ability.

I have been training a Greco-Roman approach for a few years now (though we allow leg attacks). Each passing year, the understanding deepens just because we are wrestling all the time. Do that too and you'll see results.

The 2 in 1 is a great tool for weapons work (counter-knife). There again comes the need to combine that with driving, dominant head position. The need for this is always important, though for counter-knife is critical. Play around enough with this and you'll see this reality for yourself.

Tanswell's stuff is great. So are the vids from Jerry Wetzel ("Red Zone"), which I would encourage anyone interested in seeing good counter-knife to look into.

Quote:

Also do you know of Jim Mccann's material?Is it all it claims?I saw one being praised as the best 'street grappling' DVD.It had the usual 'beat street attacks and trained athlete' quotes.

I have no experience with McCanns's stuff so I can't offer comment. Honestly, fundamentals are everything. Thats really all you need instruction on. Once you have those, a year of playing the games will have you not really needing to spend a lot of more "advanced" instruction.

John, what's your view on bobbing and weaving and fighting out of a crouch in the cotnext of mma? A lot of guys avoid doing that even though it works well in boxing, because of the possibility of knees or snap downs. I ike the tactic and I think it can give another way to enter the clinch but is it more dangerous than it's worth (I'm talking about bobbing and weaving a la Tyson or Dempsey)?

_________________________
Member of DaJoGen MMA school under Dave Hagen and Team Chaos fight team under Denver Mangiyatan and Chris Toquero, ran out of Zanshin Martial Arts in Salem Oregon: http://www.zanshinarts.org/Home.aspx,

On another note, how does COunter Assault Tactics relate to Vunak's RAT? IS it jsut a knock off of RAT?

_________________________
Member of DaJoGen MMA school under Dave Hagen and Team Chaos fight team under Denver Mangiyatan and Chris Toquero, ran out of Zanshin Martial Arts in Salem Oregon: http://www.zanshinarts.org/Home.aspx,

Quote:TEK, you understand the principles behind the RAT concept. Three core modes; interception, pressure and termination (hate using that word...I prefer the term "resolution").

So what's happening is that Voo was using eye jabs and destructions as his intercept..more or less, right? Then the straight blast as his pressure tactic. After that it was the double neck tie as his delivery system for knees, elbows and the headbutt.

Well, conceptually, none of that has changed really. What's been modified as some of the tactics for accomplishing each end.

Lets start with the intercepts. I don't like the long-range eye jab that Vunak LOVES. I do however like the elbow destruction and use it quite regularly to great effect in the gym. We've all felt it and it hurts, even through 16oz boxing gloves. The problem with teaching that to folks is, those are just "moves". That's a whole other issue beyond what we're trying to discuss presently.

I don't like the eye jab because there is nothing on it. Honestly, I would rather pop someone with a stiff jab than to "flick" an eye jab out. The jab has more on it. Taking a slight step forward into it can disrupt someone's timing, rhythm and footwork, etc. It's just more substantial. Ever walk right through someone's weak jab? People will. If a person doesn't have a jab worthy of respect, a person will walk straight through it. Flicking an eye jab out is weaker than the weakest jab if it doesn't land on the eyeball (which is a small target for a small weapon - in other words, it's hard to hit, particularly if your opponent is hitting you and otherwise has his guard/hands up as well). Thus I've thrown the eye jab out. Besides, eye jabs are easily thrown if you've been working your boxing jab any length of time. I would just rather have a credible, legitimate and verifiable technique (in terms of having seen it land and having seen the results in training). Thus, the jab is an even BETTER intercept as it accomplishes the same things in a better manner.

The "spike" (elbow destruction) is something that I've seen to work. With good timing and out of a boxing delivery system, that is something that I consider "high percentage" (which is the only thing I keep, everything else is thrown out).

So, from an interception point of view, having a decent boxing game is TEN times better than practicing eye jabs and destructions by themselves. If I had to put my money on someone in a fight, I would always put it on a boxer vs. some guy that has been practicing eye jabs. Just me.

The straight blast is "ok". I would personally rather use the modified "boxing blast", but I'm not going to completely throw out the straight blast altogether. The problem with that is again, that there is nothing on it, unless you can run into it full-bore. If you're using it to obtain the clinch, I think it's ok. My only opinion here is that the boxing blast is safer. You have to have more timing when using that because it's slower. But timing is an important attribute anyway and it's worth developing. Thats another reason why training delivery systems is important rather than just learning moves.

In terms of pressure (which the blast is designed to do), one can also use good boxing combinations to do the same thing. Pressure doesn't obviously have to always be "forward". Pressure can come by a disparity of skill and force. In other words, throw good tight combos in the face of someone who can't box and you'll see them fold up like a chair. Thats another form of pressure that comes from having functional delivery systems.

The "termination" stage is simply either chooing to disengage (pretty easily if you're outclassing someone, difficult if you're not) or choosing to "beat on them like they stole something" (to borrow a phrase). Whether that happens in the free movement range or happens in the clinch doesn't matter. But if we're talking about the clinch, I personally want to control at least one arm and the neck, as opposed to just the neck alone. I prefer to have an all-around clinch game rather than just the double neck tie. More options = mo' better.

All in all, it's still fundamentally the same - put some hurt on your opponent more than he does to you in ways which are simultaneously offensive and defensive, as the RAT was intended to be.

In regard to Erik Paulson, he develops "delivery systems" as opposed to just teaching someone a collection of moves. There's a difference. However, an armbar in MMA is an armbar on the street, or anywhere else. A punch is a punch. A shoulder lock is a shoulder lock. You have to have an athletic model of training these attacks and that's all he does. His fighters are more than capable of defending themselves because of his approach. It's hard to argue with athleticism, conditioning, experience and skill.

-John

Straight Blast Gym's "Crazy Monkey" boxing is a really awesome delivery system for elbow destructions. If you want to become really great at elbow destructions, then work a boxing corner drill at every training session utilizing the crazy monkey. Elbow destructions just kind of happen on their own from this structure. Great stuff!

I'm actually taking a look at CM systems stuff. Rodney King has got some great ideas. Essential the same stuff I'm learning from Voo.

Infact I notice Matt Hamil the deaf UFC fighter, holds his hands up to his head using his elbows to block punches to his face.

I still prefer Vu's style which is more of a MT style of keeping your hands up high, this doesnt impair your vision as much as CM's version does. Vu's requires a lot of footwork and keeping your distance in kickboxers range in order to make it work. I assume CM's just the same, only he doesn't mention it.

One thing I don't like about CM is that he drops his hands agin to go into boxing. But I guess i just need to become more proficient in it.

Vu's Rat system favors the straight blast. Goes well with keeping the hands up high guard.

Glad someone was finally willing to post on this thread. I hope more to come.

Quote:John, what's your view on bobbing and weaving and fighting out of a crouch in the cotnext of mma? A lot of guys avoid doing that even though it works well in boxing, because of the possibility of knees or snap downs.

I agree that it puts you at risk for exactly the reasons you mention. Bending over at the waist - not good. Changing level on the other hand is a different story. You can modify the bob & weave by less of a shift, as well as duck beneath a punch by changing level. Bending forward at the waist just isn't a good idea. It's the reason a Greco-Roman approach to wrestling for fighting is preferred over the freestyle/folkstyle stance.

Quote:

I like the tactic and I think it can give another way to enter the clinch but is it more dangerous than it's worth (I'm talking about bobbing and weaving a la Tyson or Dempsey)?

Again, you can modify these things. Ultimately it comes down to you, and how good your timing, set-ups and overall experience is in relation to whom you're fighting.

Quote:On another note, how does Counter Assault Tactics relate to Vunak's RAT? IS it jsut a knock off of RAT?

Are you speaking of Demi Barbito's program? I can't speak for Demi, but I believe he was a former student of Vunak. Undoubtedly that influence has shaped his point of view. The CAT is just his take on the whole thing, although I can't speak with any certainty because I've not seen his material nor trained with him. He seems like a knowledgeable guy.

janxspirit wrote:

Quote:

Straight Blast Gym's "Crazy Monkey" boxing is a really awesome delivery system for elbow destructions. If you want to become really great at elbow destructions, then work a boxing corner drill at every training session utilizing the crazy monkey. Elbow destructions just kind of happen on their own from this structure. Great stuff!

The fundamentals of the CM are phenominal. I agree that spikes can occur out of the CM mechanics. The Crazy Monkey method is whole different animal in it's own right. Great material there!

Tek9 wrote:

Quote:I'm actually taking a look at CM systems stuff. Rodney King has got some great ideas. Essential the same stuff I'm learning from Voo.

I definitely believe there is some overlap, though that is incidental. However it shows you that people can come up with a lot of the same concepts. Rodney's material is just SO rooted in establishing solid fundamentals for a good game.

Quote:

Infact I notice Matt Hamil the deaf UFC fighter, holds his hands up to his head using his elbows to block punches to his face.

Quinton Jackson (Rampage) also uses the same essential mechanics for his defense.

Quote:

I still prefer Vu's style which is more of a MT style of keeping your hands up high, this doesnt impair your vision as much as CM's version does.

Oddly enough (and I wasn't going to mention this, but I feel it's necessary here), I've been certified by Vunak and I'm now a rep for Rodney King. I feel I can speak for both programs on some level here.

I think there are still some misconceptions about the CM approach that exist. Having trained using this method since 2002, it's a HUGE (HUGE) part of my game. The CM isn't a "static" motion that you have to use all the time. Also, I don't notice any lack of vision at all whenever I'm applying the mechanics properly. I think that's a key point.

Quote:

Vu's requires a lot of footwork and keeping your distance in kickboxers range in order to make it work. I assume CM's just the same, only he doesn't mention it.

Absolutely. This again is another area of similarity. In the CM school of thought, that outside distance is known as the "Rimshot" range. There are various stages/phases of the CM. That distance is known as CM1. However you aren't limited to this stage or distance, obviously. It's just that a fundamental game begins at that stage.

Quote:

One thing I don't like about CM is that he drops his hands agin to go into boxing. But I guess i just need to become more proficient in it.

Well, that's just Rodney. Actually, he doesn't encourage people to drop their hands. But you see, that's his individual style. That's what he would have called, CM5, which is thought of as "attribute-based boxing" as opposed to CM stages 1 through 4. In fact, he preaches that everyone should remain in the CM posture throughout their sparring sessions on both sides of the coin (offense and defense). In other words, you will fire your strikes out of that high cover position.

Its just that for folks who have some experience and skill in boxing, you are "allowed" to play a looser, more attribute driven game. That's what its called CM5, not CM1. Just thought I would add some clarity to that. There are a lot of things about the method that people outside of the program aren't completely aware of (for example, the inclusion of the clinch, etc).

Quote:Vu's Rat system favors the straight blast. Goes well with keeping the hands up high guard. Glad someone was finally willing to post on this thread. I hope more to come.

The straight blast is something I feel is workable at any point. In fact, the boxing blast (which I prefer) works quite well out of the CM structure.

You guys got me wondering about this CM stuff so I looked at some youtube videos. Already it's showed me stuff I've been doing wrong and can now correct, sweet! He has this modified duck thing that sounds about liek what you were saying on to do with bobbing and weaving John. Just to make sure I'm on the right track, when you say branching out does that mena, once you've got yoru fudnamentals down pretty well, you can pick up random things you like from other styles as long as you maintain your core method? You said you've pulled in some Silat to your game, are they just random Silat techniques you like or do you put more time into learning basic Silat principles and whatnot?I ask because there are of coruse as you know other stuff I like, especially from Kenpo, but I'm not sure how to itnegrate that into a boxing/mma/RAT (which I still love) approach. I tend to give up most of my "fundamentals" and go all out Kenpo if I try to use it. I suppose I would have to modify a lot of the Kenpo to make it fit.

_________________________
Member of DaJoGen MMA school under Dave Hagen and Team Chaos fight team under Denver Mangiyatan and Chris Toquero, ran out of Zanshin Martial Arts in Salem Oregon: http://www.zanshinarts.org/Home.aspx,

Quote:He has this modified duck thing that sounds about like what you were saying on to do with bobbing and weaving John.

Yes Stormy, that's it exactly. He's modified things to work for real fights, but it's not BS. It's all functional; trained against progressive resistance and "alive".

Quote:

Just to make sure I'm on the right track, when you say branching out does that mean, once you've got your fundamentals down pretty well, you can pick up random things you like from other styles as long as you maintain your core method?

That's basically it. However there is one caveat; whatever you "branch out" with, should somewhat fit within the fundamentals of the delivery systems you're working the fundamentals OUT of. In other words, if I'm boxing, I'm probably not going to start doing crane style kung fu, etc.

Quote:You said you've pulled in some Silat to your game, are they just random Silat techniques you like or do you put more time into learning basic Silat principles and whatnot?

Well, it's nothing too fancy. You want to stay with techniques that you can train alive. Some moves just do not fit within that criteria. The easier moves are the one's you want to start playing with, in SPARRING. That's key. Whatever you do, should be able to be done during sparring, because that's the key to knowing whether or not you can apply them during a fight. The more complex the move obviously, the less chance it has of working.

The kali-silat stuff that I work in include elbow spikes, foot sweeps, a kenjit. Nothing too crazy. But that's because the easy stuff from boxing and wrestling actually works better. Thats why that sort of stuff is the foundation.

Quote:

I ask because there are of coruse as you know other stuff I like, especially from Kenpo, but I'm not sure how to itnegrate that into a boxing/mma/RAT (which I still love) approach. I tend to give up most of my "fundamentals" and go all out Kenpo if I try to use it. I suppose I would have to modify a lot of the Kenpo to make it fit.

Fighting is fighting. I don't care what 'style' you're using. If it doesn't work in sparring (fighting), it probably isn't worth practicing. Seriously! Everything you want to branch out with, should work within the sparring environment. If not, contemplate why it doesn't. Think hard about that.

Hey John, right now I'm in a situation where I dont have a training partner. I do a lot of shadowboxing and single person drills (not kata) but what would you do in my place?I'm kind of screwed although a couple guys in my unit are mma fighters (pretty good ones too fighting with team quest Portland) but they dont live too close. I dont have the money to train at a gym and my usual training partner lives a ways away now. Kinda screwed.

Edited by Stormdragon (11/16/0809:35 PM)

_________________________
Member of DaJoGen MMA school under Dave Hagen and Team Chaos fight team under Denver Mangiyatan and Chris Toquero, ran out of Zanshin Martial Arts in Salem Oregon: http://www.zanshinarts.org/Home.aspx,

Seems like the Keysi guys have incorporated some of the Crazy Monkey stuff into their approach.

Anyone know much about Keysi other than its use in the new Batman movies? I know that the founders are full instructors under Inosanto--and there's definitely the JKD influence in there--but I'm yet to see the stuff sparred.

As you said John:

Quote:If it doesn't work in sparring (fighting), it probably isn't worth practicing. Seriously! Everything you want to branch out with, should work within the sparring environment. If not, contemplate why it doesn't. Think hard about that.

I get tired of these so-called JKD guys like Carruthers who never seem to post sparring examples. I mean, maybe Carruthers is good, but is there any example of him sparring out there?

That guy moves like greased lightning, and is insanely strong. I dont care how little sparring he does I wouldnt mess with him with anything shrot of a .357 lol

_________________________
Member of DaJoGen MMA school under Dave Hagen and Team Chaos fight team under Denver Mangiyatan and Chris Toquero, ran out of Zanshin Martial Arts in Salem Oregon: http://www.zanshinarts.org/Home.aspx,

I have seen the Enigma series. Not to knock Vunak, but I would consider placing my hard-earned money elsewhere -- unless of course, you just happen to like his idea of training. I left that sort of thing several years back.

On this series, he shows how to conduct training, by exponentially "stacking" training concepts and techniques into infinity. Nice idea. The problem however (IMO) are the techniques and drills themselves.

I watched this for all of about five minutes before I realized that it wasn't my cup of tea. There are far better methods. Less is more anyway. Focus on fundamentals and drill THEM into infinity. You'll be far better off.

Actually, I liked the enigma. Personally, I like a lot of Vunak's stuff. I had a couple of private lessons with one of his long time students a couple of months ago, and I really liked some of the PFS drills. That being said, I can see how some might not find much merit in some of it. I think (and I'm a noob with PFS, so take it FWIW) Vunak kind of straddles the line between Inosanto's JKDC and SBG. There are less pattern drills, but there are still some there. I guess it just depends on your learning style to some degree. Some of Vunak's stuff is 'dead pattern drills', but the dead stuff does, for me at least, transfers over into more alive work. So, in a sense, it isn't really 'dead' at all, just more 'indirect' of a learning method. Like I say, I dig a lot of it, but that's my learning style--your milage may vary.

--Chris

_________________________
"Seek not to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought."--Basho

My story is that I'm moving to L.A. soon from Tennessee, and while I never believe in "quick fixes," I would like to start arming myself with some practical knowledge on how to protect myself. Vunak's stuff seems really direct and "street," and I don't want to screw around, because a friend of mine who moved out to L.A. in June was recently mugged in August. I grew up outside of L.A. and two other friends of mine who I grew up with were both mugged at gunpoint out there. That's three people that I know who were mugged in Southern California, and, not to sound egotistical, but I'm a good-looking guy going into the movie biz who kinda sticks out like a sore thumb. I don't want to take any chances, because I know that the threat is real in a major city like L.A. I completely plan to train in JKD once I get out there, but I want to get a head start before I even get there with some things that work.

Quote:Actually, I liked the enigma. Personally, I like a lot of Vunak's stuff. I had a couple of private lessons with one of his long time students a couple of months ago, and I really liked some of the PFS drills. That being said, I can see how some might not find much merit in some of it. I think (and I'm a noob with PFS, so take it FWIW) Vunak kind of straddles the line between Inosanto's JKDC and SBG. There are less pattern drills, but there are still some there. I guess it just depends on your learning style to some degree. Some of Vunak's stuff is 'dead pattern drills', but the dead stuff does, for me at least, transfers over into more alive work. So, in a sense, it isn't really 'dead' at all, just more 'indirect' of a learning method. Like I say, I dig a lot of it, but that's my learning style--your milage may vary.

Quote:Actually, I liked the enigma. Personally, I like a lot of Vunak's stuff. I had a couple of private lessons with one of his long time students a couple of months ago, and I really liked some of the PFS drills.

Like I said, I didn't see a great deal of it, so I should really reserve judgment. I just based my opinion on having trained with Vunak as well as the SBG and CMD groups. Not knocking Vu in any way. The other groups simply resonated with me in a way that the PFS group did not.

Quote:That being said, I can see how some might not find much merit in some of it. I think (and I'm a noob with PFS, so take it FWIW) Vunak kind of straddles the line between Inosanto's JKDC and SBG. There are less pattern drills, but there are still some there. I guess it just depends on your learning style to some degree. Some of Vunak's stuff is 'dead pattern drills', but the dead stuff does, for me at least, transfers over into more alive work.

You know, there is an important quality to the dead stuff to some degree. In the SBG, the "introduction" phase of learning could be loosely (perhaps very loosely) equated to the dead patterns of PFS. It's all there, just done in a different way. As the SBG guys will tell you, the introduction phase is important. After a while though, one rarely has to move back to that stage. Guys can come right in and begin a session at an early level of "Isolation" training (using the "I-Method" approach to coaching).

MartialMack wrote

Quote:John--

Are you saying that he basically overdoes it?

For my tastes, simplicity means more. Depth (as opposed to breadth) means more to me. I would rather know less and be great at that than know a little about a lot. Solid fundamentals, while not flashy or pretty always, mean more to me than anything else. The reason this is so is because I spar frequently. I spar hard regularly. I have learned that having a small base of fundamental skills has done more for me than all of the martial arts techniques I have accumulated over the years have.

I'm not saying that you cannot learn those fundamentals at any PFS group. This will depend on the group. It should be known that even I run a PFS group (certified by Vunak in 2002, although I am not on the current instructors list).

Quote:

And can you recommend something else?

If you are moving to LA, you should not walk, but RUN to Jerry's Wetzel's " Centerline Gym ". He is a former PFS instructor as well as having been with the SBG and now with the CMD group. He also is the creator the "Red Zone" counter knife program. He has also worked with Tony Blauer. The man knows his stuff.

But aside from all of that, Jerry is one of the friendliest, down to earth guys I've ever met involved with this stuff. You should at least email him (tell him John Kogas sent you) or pay him a visit. If not, you'll miss one of the greatest training opportunities that you could EVER have. Particularly in LA. I will be at his place in May/June if you happen to there, attending the trainers clinic.

Quote:

Vunak's stuff seems really direct and "street," and I don't want to screw around, because a friend of mine who moved out to L.A. in June was recently mugged in August. I grew up outside of L.A. and two other friends of mine who I grew up with were both mugged at gunpoint out there. That's three people that I know who were mugged in Southern California, and, not to sound egotistical, but I'm a good-looking guy going into the movie biz who kinda sticks out like a sore thumb. I don't want to take any chances, because I know that the threat is real in a major city like L.A. I completely plan to train in JKD once I get out there, but I want to get a head start before I even get there with some things that work.

If you're good looking and moving to LA, you will probably want to be armed to the teeth. Just kidding. Hey, at least OJ is in prison now. That means there is one less murderer walking around free. The crime rate has fallen off considerably!

Seriously, talk to Jerry W. Tell him exactly what you are looking for. Then realize that he's got ALL of that stuff that you're wanting. Keep in mind that I've done the PFS thing, and you're right, it is 'street', but so is the stuff that we're doing now. If you have any questions about that, ask him and ask me here as well. That's what this place is for.

Quote:For my tastes, simplicity means more. Depth (as opposed to breadth) means more to me. I would rather know less and be great at that than know a little about a lot. Solid fundamentals, while not flashy or pretty always, mean more to me than anything else. The reason this is so is because I spar frequently. I spar hard regularly. I have learned that having a small base of fundamental skills has done more for me than all of the martial arts techniques I have accumulated over the years have.

My instincts have me totally agreeing with this. I've already started to roll my eyes a lot of these techniques that look "pretty" when demonstrated, but are never demonstrated in a sparring or live context.

I'm just such a huge Bruce fan, and I know that keeping it simple and sparring hard was just such a big thing for him. I can't wait to do some real sparring instead of some the Karate stuff I did when I was younger...that also got my ass kicked by a very good little Mexican boxer I went to school with in California. That's what got the wheels turning for me, so I wasn't surprised when I started looking into JKD and learned that Bruce was huge into incorporating boxing concepts into his approach (as I understand it, the Chinatown fight caused him to reevaluate his whole approach as well).

Quote:If you are moving to LA, you should not walk, but RUN to Jerry's Wetzel's " Centerline Gym ". He is a former PFS instructor as well as having been with the SBG and now with the CMD group. He also is the creator the "Red Zone" counter knife program. He has also worked with Tony Blauer. The man knows his stuff.

But aside from all of that, Jerry is one of the friendliest, down to earth guys I've ever met involved with this stuff. You should at least email him (tell him John Kogas sent you) or pay him a visit. If not, you'll miss one of the greatest training opportunities that you could EVER have. Particularly in LA. I will be at his place in May/June if you happen to there, attending the trainers clinic.

Wow, this is some really great info...

The Centerline Gym looks amazing! I will try to contact Jerry immediately, and I'll definitely tell him that John Kogas sent me! I'm also really interested in the CMD stuff as it seems like one of the most logical defense approaches I've ever seen. Like I said a few weeks ago on here, seems like the Keysi guys have incorporated some of it in their stuff (and hey, if it works for Batman...).

Quote:If you're good looking and moving to LA, you will probably want to be armed to the teeth. Just kidding. Hey, at least OJ is in prison now. That means there is one less murderer walking around free. The crime rate has fallen off considerably!

Seriously, talk to Jerry W. Tell him exactly what you are looking for. Then realize that he's got ALL of that stuff that you're wanting. Keep in mind that I've done the PFS thing, and you're right, it is 'street', but so is the stuff that we're doing now. If you have any questions about that, ask him and ask me here as well. That's what this place is for.

Believe me, this thread is a great resource! I appreciate your help, and I definitely hope to meet you this summer. This all seems like a great group to be a part of...

For those who haven' seen it the enigma is a great series. The series is divided in two parts self preservation and self perfection. The first half being Self Preservation which is the complete RAT, Vunaks streamline version of JDK, all the hard hitting stuff, the most brutal techniques in JKD's arsenal. All the eye gouging, biting, headbutts, knees, and elbows. Including how to deal with multiple attackers and defanging the snake.

The second DVD is self perfection; other techniques found in JDK all functional but less brutal. For example in this section he goes over certain locks and submission techniques explaining how they are accidental if not incidental. Here he describes more the his art and his philosophy.

John,

I think you would have found the first part of the series slightly more interesting. Although nothing new to you, he just goes over the RAT in more depth than any of his other videos.

I've been a away for a while but still practicing. The way me and my brother train, we are using the RAT system as a blue print and expanding on it...as we should be.

With the advice of John I've been looking into other systems of delivery. Such as Randy Couture's clinch and his evolution of Greco clinch work into MMA, along with Rodney Kings CM style stand up defensive techniques such as the 3-point shield. Also I'm currently working on incorporating wrestling pummeling into my game, using Eric Paulson's CSW method. Paulson's techniques are a real eye opener, I never new wrestling could be so effective in terms of real combat. Its a lot more than just shooting in for the take downs, i dunno how to describe it, except its like "power judo" not as graceful as Karo Parisian sweeps, throws or flips someone, but very hard hitting non the less.

There was a question earlier about the difference between PFS and SBGI. In my opinion from what i have seen, PFS uses more traditional drills. To help train attributes. Both camps have the exact techniques. PFS is more focused on street, weapons and multiple attacks. While SBGI focuses a lot more on BJJ and competition.

If I were to say the main difference its Thornton's definition of aliveness. He has discarded chi sao, hubud, energy and sensitivity drills, because he feels they lack resistance.

But then again its all progressive. For some people the need to practice something as closely as it is used functionally is important. But there are ways to train using indirect methods. A good example could be using the jump rope. Here u train all sorts of attributes, foot work, balance, coordination, stamina. It may not be alive, but they do increase important attributes.

John I hope your still around, cuz I have some questions to ask. Like how to train with big boned people? ^^.

I cant pull a guard one of my friends he is just to big and my legs are to short. I cant close my guard, and its hard to control him.

Quote: Essentially, Lee felt that people had more confidence and faith in "systems" and styles than in themselves, thus the tendency to clinch to fixed forms, etc. I have experienced this myself with people who came to me wanting to learn Vunak's "RAT" system. It's really interesting.

Now I'm not saying it isn't worth learning the RAT or anything else, but just to do so and leave it at that is to cling to a very rigid form.

I started off learning the RAT because it gave me a model to focus on. So I and my brother began to really focus on grasping method.

Later on I started feeling like I was starting to follow a set system. And I started wondering if I had fallen into a trap. I was starting to believe the "this is all u need to know" message that Vunak kept repeating.

But as I started training and sparring more with different people at different levels. I started noticing that once getting into the clinch range. I wasn't always able to pull off a double neck tie on everyone. So I started looking at pummeling, single neck ties. This opened up a whole new avenue for me.

Then through the suggestions of others on this forum, I started looking into Rodney king, Eric Paulson, and Randy Couture.

Rodney Kings boxing defenses and clinch work just expanded Vunak's RAT system for me. I was no longer just dancing from the outside waiting for a destruction or interception. I could now come in attacking, take cover using his 3 point block, clinch up, or change levels and take down my opponents.

So I guess I am no loner just following this rigid method of training. And of course this has nothing to do with Vunaks golden goose chart.

I'm really getting into King's stuff lately, and wish there was a local CM gym around--sadly there isn't.

Tek, I think we have had similar experiances with the RAT. It provides a nice 'framework', but it can become a trap. I think one of the issues with it is that when it first appeared, there weren't many strikers who had a good clinch game (aside from Muay Thai guys), mostly because MMA wasn't around. As things have progressed, more and more strikers are learning the importance of the clinch, and so getting a double neck tie is getting harder. It's nice to have in the arsenal, but I've decided that depending on it (like depending on any technique) is wrong.

And John, you're right about the Golden Goose. Not only is it a big time waster, I find that it only helps fetishize martial arts. It seems to function opposite of daily decrease.

--Chris

_________________________
"Seek not to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought."--Basho

I started off learning the RAT because it gave me a model to focus on. So I and my brother began to really focus on grasping method.

Later on I started feeling like I was starting to follow a set system. And I started wondering if I had fallen into a trap. I was starting to believe the "this is all u need to know" message that Vunak kept repeating.

Nothing wrong with using it as a starting point. Vunak had a decent idea with the RAT because it simplified options. However, what he created with that was more like a strategy (he uses the term, "game plan", which is appropriate). But the problem is that many people have come to think this strategy was also a good training method, which ii isn't.

What happens is you get a lot of people who are really interested in learning the RAT and then want to go and train it, just like it's shown. Then when you show them kickboxing, clinch, ground fighting, stick and knife material, they don't understand. They become confused about what at first seems like conflicting material.

Many people, including some that I know personally, did fall into the "this is all you need to know" trap. It's been tough convincing some otherwise.

Originally Posted By: TeK9

But as I started training and sparring more with different people at different levels. I started noticing that once getting into the clinch range. I wasn't always able to pull off a double neck tie on everyone. So I started looking at pummeling, single neck ties. This opened up a whole new avenue for me.

The double neck tie can be a bit of a problem for women or smaller guys to obtain on bigger and taller opponents. And it's not usually the smaller guys that go around picking fights with bigger individuals. Thus we should assume that an opponent is likely to be bigger and stronger than we are, if we're planning for the worst case scenario.

However, having a "default" position or preferably, several default positions that you are comfortable fighting from is a good idea! The double neck tie is a valid default if you are skilled enough in its application. But again, I think it's wise to have several such defaults.

Originally Posted By: TeK9

Then through the suggestions of others on this forum, I started looking into Rodney king, Eric Paulson, and Randy Couture.

Rodney Kings boxing defenses and clinch work just expanded Vunak's RAT system for me. I was no longer just dancing from the outside waiting for a destruction or interception. I could now come in attacking, take cover using his 3 point block, clinch up, or change levels and take down my opponents.

So I guess I am no longer just following this rigid method of training. And of course this has nothing to do with Vunaks golden goose chart.

I think it's definitely important to expand your game. Nothing wrong with having a starting point at all, which I think Vunak's material provides. But it's healthier to develop an understanding of "game" than it is to rely on a set of moves that you can't practice realistically. The RAT wasn't/isn't always taught with that notion in mind.

Remember, "material" (techniques) is always neutral. Training methods are what is important. You either train functionally or you don't. When I see Vunak's guys "pretending" to be straight blasted in training, etc....it makes me a little nauseous.

You can only learn to fight when your opponents or training partners are allowed to fight back. That's what happens in real life, and our training should reflect that.

Originally Posted By: Ames

I'm really getting into King's stuff lately, and wish there was a local CM gym around--sadly there isn't.

I have found that King's approach can really help a lot of people, not just with understanding the stand-up game, but with understanding good training methods as well. There is a wealth of material to draw from in his approach. Working with them has really expanded my game to a degree that I've never before known. But what is even better is the fact that they're really cool people.

Originally Posted By: Ames

Tek, I think we have had similar experiances with the RAT. It provides a nice 'framework', but it can become a trap. I think one of the issues with it is that when it first appeared, there weren't many strikers who had a good clinch game (aside from Muay Thai guys), mostly because MMA wasn't around. As things have progressed, more and more strikers are learning the importance of the clinch, and so getting a double neck tie is getting harder. It's nice to have in the arsenal, but I've decided that depending on it (like depending on any technique) is wrong.

Yep, aside from Anderson Silva, you really haven't seen a lot of double neck tie in high level mma. Not that it shouldn't be trained or the defenses to it learned though. But I believe there are better options available.

Originally Posted By: Ames

And John, you're right about the Golden Goose. Not only is it a big time waster, I find that it only helps fetishize martial arts. It seems to function opposite of daily decrease.

It's daily "Increase". If people used the Golden Goose, they would be training functionality OUT of themselves. The Golden Goose is a symptom of the classic JKD Concepts use of the "buffet approach" to martial arts training. I saw it and was disgusted. As the old saying goes; You can give a man a fish every day, or you can teach him how to fish for himself. On the surface, it may look as if the Golden Goose was teaching people how to fish. Instead, it only teaches how to give people fish in endless ways. Not a good thing.

Depth is ALWAYS better than breadth. I think almost anyone can see the logic in that.

Depth is ALWAYS better than breadth. I think almost anyone can see the logic in that.

Absolutely. It's ironic that Vunak titled this one 'Enigma', because that sums him up pretty well, I think. Here you have a guy who ultra simplified things with the R.A.T. and now comes out with the over complicated Golden Goose. I still like a lot of his ideas, but between the Golden Goose and the whole 'Executive PFS' thing, I don't think I like the direction he is headed. Of course, there is no doubt that he is a great martial artist and fighter.

--Chris

_________________________
"Seek not to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought."--Basho

Vunak IS an enigma, no doubt. He's always trying to stay ahead of the curve I think. The man was one of the first to really push BJJ to the JKD crowd. He has always thought outside of the box.

But yeah, I agree about the Golden Goose and 'Executive PFS'...seriously, what is that about?! I thought it was pretty classless to essentially "demote" his long-time senior instructors the way he did. And what's really changed?? The material is the same. He's training essentially the same way he always has. What was he attempting to do, make people think that 'Executive PFS' was some new program with never-seen-before material or something? What else could he have been thinking?

And I still wonder what happened to Roy Harris. Roy was the vice president of PFS for a number of years. Then I noticed that he was booted out, only to be replaced by Bruce Corrigan in Tennessee. That was when Vunak created 'DEFCON PFS'. I mean, how silly is that?!

Well, that didn't last long and Vu decided (virtually overnight) that he didn't want Corrigan as his VP either, so then HE was out. Then it was 'Executive PFS'. My guess is he decided to start going after the white collar demographic. Maybe he saw more potential money there?

Well, it's his group and its his prerogative to run it as he sees fit. But I still hate it for the senior guys who poured out their blood, sweat and tears (along with some cold hard cash I might add). What happened to them for their efforts? They get demoted, as I said. Others aren't even acknowledged (like myself and others that I know who aren't even listed on his instructor page).

All that having been said, I do believe I know where Vunak is coming from with the training (beyond the politics). I can see his point of view and I understand it completely. I just believe in going in a slightly different route to get to the same destination, if that makes any sense.

I thought I would keep this thread going a bit longer, given that I have personally been asked by several people in 'real' life to revisit the material. I wanted to discuss what I consider to be the drawbacks, as well as ways in which the program could be improved upon.

I believe that the improvements will be obvious once the drawbacks are listed, so lets get right to it.

What does the RAT consist of? Three phases right? Interception (referred to as "entries" here), Pressure and Termination (or "resolution", borrowing the ISR Matrix). Lets talk about each of them individually for a moment.EntryThe problem in my opinion is found right out of the gate with the "entry" deal. If you are familiar with the RAT, you'll know that these "entries", as taught in the plan, consist of two basic things: eye jabs and destructions. This is where I have the biggest problem.

Let me first say that I don't have a problem with the eye jab or destructions per se'. I have used destructions during boxing and they can hurt. You can feel them through 16oz gloves. You don't get them all the time though, and they're nothing that I would want to use to gain the entry behind. Besides, some people don't feel pain when they are amped up. So, basing your entry on creating a moment of pain is not what I'm banking on (not that it can't happen). The eye jab is also a nice tool that is perhaps better used before shots are being thrown, before the adrenaline dump, etc.

Now lets imagine your opponent is the proverbial, 6'3", 400lb, [censored] off Samoan, and he is about to smoke you with a haymaker coming all the way from the South Pacific. You're standing in front of him with that shot coming and you're going to eye jab him? Honestly, there is just not enough on that strike to stop that punch, imo.

Plus, if you have ever tried to "destroy" a haymaker, you'll know that you have only so many options, most of which are not what I would consider to be safe, conservative choices. It's a tough angle. Again, it's not that these can't work, only that you have to be *really good* (I mean, really good, to the point where you are out-classing your opponent) to make it happen. And given that the RAT is marketed to "non martial artists", you'll begin to see some questionable, incongruities here. If one truly is a "non martial artist", he/she can't afford to be "playing around" out in the long range using eye 'boinks' and trying to destroy punches. It just doesn't seem feasible or even realistic. In fact, it seems comical when you think about it.

But don't take MY word for it or anything else here. Get a reasonably large, athletic friend (make sure he's at least 20lbs larger than you are), put gloves on him and tell him to try his best to knock you out. As he does this, try and destroy his punch. If he is skilled, so much the better. Try it and see what the results are.

Pressure (straight blast)The idea of pressure here is also a little 'off' in my opinion. Running down the centerline with a straight blast looks and sounds like a novel idea, so long as you're on an instructional DVD. Actually this, as with any tool, has it's time and place. I just don't like it as it's used here. And personally, I would go with the 'boxing blast' over the straight blast in most cases.

First of all, many fights close right into the clinch without your having to 'enter' into it to begin with. You have a guy who is standing about three feet away and he's going to close on you with a shot...do you really think you're going to need to straight blast into the clinch, or even have the time to do so? Again, this isn't realistic. I feel this way because I believe the straight blast in this situation is used against an individual who is on defense. The only problem with this is that, attackers are going to be ATTACKING, not defending. It's its an ambush type of situation, you're are going to be in a reactive state (on the defensive).

In my experience, the "pressure"/boxing blast here, comes when you've already hit the clinch but your opponent has pushed away. He's already moving backward so you're regaining the ground lost and moving in behind cover fire. I've seen that work in sparring quite a bit in that scenario. This has shown to be much safer when used in this manner.

Ok, enough of the nit-picking for now. Lets talk about improvements we can make:

1) I believe that preemptive strikes can be beneficial. This includes the eye jab. But it's better to know how to use it and perhaps even more importantly, when. It's also good to know how to RUN FAST if that's all you have.

2) If "Really Big Guy" is standing in front of you with smoke coming out of his nostrils, have something in place that's conservative and safe. The "helmet" (three point cover) is in my opinion, the only tool for the job. This is the cornerstone for the ISR-Matrix, that our very own Fletch Fuller is involved with. Ask him about it sometime.

The helmet presents the best defense against the surprise attack and that walloping haymaker, particularly if you don't have the time to jump into your fighting stance and get about poking eyes and spiking fists. Seriously. Plus the helmet allows you to also crash (ie, "crash helmet"...get it?) into the clinch, exactly where Vunak would have you be, at the "termination" phase anyway. The helmet also makes use of the natural flinch response.

You would essentially use the helmet on the shot (lowering your center of gravity slightly), impacting your opponent with it, and securing your attachment to him. It would then be pretty easy to move right into the double neck tie from there and proceed to fire some knees into the groin or whatever. That would be pretty quick, giving you the center position as well. Knee like hell, then escape.

Elbowing, headbutting, thumbing the eyes, etc., would all be available, just the same. The key is to train it with progressive resistance and variable intensity. But at some point, you have to pressure test it.

Another benefit of the helmet is that if your opponent decides to change level and tackle you, the very same structure becomes the defense to that as well, using the same lowering of your own level to accomplish that. Two birds killed with one stone. You know, when you have one universal solution to a variety of problems, life it much easier.

The same structure also works if the guy is swing a bottle or a tire iron. I would gladly sacrifice the limb before I would the head. Even if the guy has a knife; if you don't see what he has in his hand, you're going to treat it like a punch swinging at you. Again, one universal solution.

Personally, I feel that the RAT is something that could work when modified in this manner (but then again, it would no longer be the RAT, would it). I just think that this program as it stands now, would only work against the most unskilled, "unworthy", corpse of an opponent. We should probably spend our time practicing with aliveness and developing true skill as opposed to "gimmick" moves (though the helmet used in this sense is a viable technique).

Alright, it's late. We can talk about the dreaded "termination" phase later.

I don't know exactly what RAT or PFS is but I do know one must expand on his teachings. From what I can gather this Vunak person should't boast anything is all you need to know. I also gather he has done well to put systems together that do cater to certain students, I think it would be up to the students to further investigate the reality of the situation in order to truly become students.

Keep in mid that Vunak created the RAT as a quick study course for military and LEO's. And he now advertises it as a quick training course for non martial artist. Kind of like weekend warrior training course. He doesn't mean this is all there is to know. Just that for someone who is not trained in combat can use these few techniques to defend themselves against an attacker.

It just so happen that his RAT program has been adopted by thousands of martial artist regardless of style as a learning or an equation of combat.

There's so much more to it, and you can build so much from it, as I have been doing.

I've recently learned I have an aptitude for pummeling. And my brother has a natural affinity to leg locks and other painful techniques.

This should have been apparent when I first taught him finger, wrist, elbow and shoulder locks many years ago.

The South African Defense Force conceived a martial art in the 1980's this art recently became R.A.T. or Rough And Tumble. The style is actually an approach to martial arts as JKD is. Originally called "Rough And Tumble: the sport of integration". Due to it's various forms and techniques borrowed from other arts. And it actually applied to become a "defense force sport", but was rejected. Reviewer's viewed it as a martial art. I guess Vunak fine tuned the style or techniques that he felt were most effective with the R.A.T. approach and sold it. Good for him.

Alright lets get this party started. Seems to me there are only 3 or 4 of us really familiar with the RAT system. Which is a shame because it encompasses really what everyone else in all the other forums are talking about...Which is combat.

John, being that I am an informal student of the RAT system, I guess its up to me to play devil's advocate, if for anything to have you elaborate even more on your point of view for my benefit and for those without a clue on the topic. Hopefully inviting more replies on the topic.

I suppose the best place to start off is the beginning with the Entry portion.

But first I want to ask to which group of people are you referring to up above? I think the RAT is different for non martial artist than it is for experienced practitioners. As an example I have a background in martial arts adapting the RAT was not difficult at all for me. Even adding more to my game has proven to be easier than i originally thought it would.

If non martial artist couldn't get a long with only the RAT, there is also the basic self defense portion. Escape To Gain Safety (ETGS) to me is a very important part of the training if your going to employ the RAT. Eyes, throat, groin, shins are the target areas regardless of the tool used. This is the first part that is taught to laymen's.

Those with experience don't require training in that area because they are already used to some level of combat.

ENTRY

Entry consists of two parts: Destruction's and Interceptions. Both are meant to illicit pain in your opponent to open a window for an assault.

Where you are in the terms of the RAT model depends in what fighting range your in. For simplicity lets start from long range. Here your in a defensive mode. Your guard is up elbows high. The main skills here is footwork. If you have plenty of room you can run. If not, then your looking for that entry.

No system of self defense will save you not even the RAT. A lot of training must be done in order to pull this off. The RAT just simplifies your understanding. Here timing, foot work, line familiarization take play. However with a few hours of practice and I mean like 50 hours compared to 2 years of martial training anyone can pull this off.

Once again here I have comment that a laymen would follow the strict model, where as someone like myself with a kick boxing background, as been able to create openings rather than wait for a destruction.

Using the high "MT" guard with your elbows high and proper footwork, the idea is to avoid punches using footwork and if one happen to land then it would be destroyed meaning block by you elbow. Causing the attack a bit of pain giving u room for an entry.

Once again there are several ways of entering, it can be done with a straight blast, boxers blast, you can even start with a jab, thigh kick, or groin kick to enter.

It doesn't necessarily has to be an eye jab. Which leads us to the second phase.

Pressure

As I said depending on the range of combat in which you are in decides which phase of the RAT your in.

For example: A woman who has just been grabbed. This would be mid range or even clinch range. Depending how she was grabbed determines her defensive attack to one of the four main targets: eyes, throat, groin, shins. This causes her attacker an instant of pain for her either to escape or enter further in the RAT.

If she enters the RAT this would put her in close range or "clinch" range. Which she proceeds with head butts, knees, and elbows. She also has the option if it is available to her to use a double neck tie to better control her assailant and continue with the attack.

Okay John I didn't get to far into the Pressure phase because I wanted to discuss more the Entry phase.

Hopefully I brought up some point regarding practitioners and on practitioners which should be addressed. When it comes to the RAT.

It is also good to mention that just because the RAT is a system or equation to simplify combat it should be noted that it takes practice to pull it off. It makes no promises and you only get what you put in. Just like any traditional form of combat.

Now these are just blanket statements obviously because there will undoubtedly be examples of where such techniques are/were effective.

But I'm more interested in what I refer to as "High Percentage" technique. I define high-percentage as something that works at least 80% of the time against at least 80% of the people you try it on, under high pressure situations. You'll come to see in that environment, that really doesn't leave a hell of a lot! That's the truth.

What I've found is that the "Crash Helmet" (or just, "helmet") is perhaps the best interceptor/entry maneuver that I know. This is particularly applicable when you have that wild, aggressive opponent swinging for the fences and coming in on you. The helmet allows you to meet that incoming force with a bit of force of your own. It would be about the only thing I would use.

Eye jabs and destructions, as taught in the RAT program, are something you'd use if you had an opponent who was more passive than aggressive. He's content to stay outside and you're both "pot-shotting" each other. You decide you have to get in. Maybe you catch one of those shots and gain a moment of timing that allows you to move in. But in my experience, it's your lucky day if you find an attacker who is passive and on the defensive, lol. Just not that many of those guys out there. That guy doesn't really want to fight. If you push it, you're the aggressor.

Pressure is something every fighter understands. When you have your opponent reeling and trying to back peddle, you smell blood and move in behind shots for the kill.

Using the Boxing Blast (a series of crosses) helps you to re-establish space if your opponent manages to escape from your Anderson Silva-like neck tie clinch.

So it's 8-step process:

1) Forklift posture as a neutral position (talk with your hands, keeping elbows in tight)

Or like this at about 18 seconds,where Malaipet just takes the hands and clears them and not waiting to be attacked.Or the other things too like just putting your arms out on their hands on the way in before they even do anything.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9EHmqEfSjo

I dont know where it fits on the 80 percent rule though as fights/situations are so random it could all come in handy depending on whats available and how good the opponent is and the situation.

_________________________
I point my saxaphone at the rare Booted Gorilla.

MATXTX are you talking about interceptions? Attacking before your opponent attacks?

An example would be like reading the guy, and getting his timing down. So you know when he is about to attack and you beat him to it.

Malaipet, that guy has wicked kicks. I saw him fight a guy who lives in my town David Douglas on an EliteXC card.

Douglas is a Gracie Fighter which is Cesar Gracie's guys. He's got great wrestling, but everything else seems lacking. Malaipet on the other hand only had his MT skills going for him, he didn't know the ground game at all.

But his kicks were phenomenal, he left welts all over Douglas. Who by the end of the fight was completely exhausted.

Kind off,yea. Its more a realisation of distance and timing. Instead of trying to stop something after it happens its realising that at a certain range you could anticipate something will DEFINITLY come and set for it before. At a further range you have time to see it more so its more likey you can move or parry,cover whatever.So if you want to clinch you can enter that range knowing something is coming and already be ready.

Or simply take their hands or clear them out the way before they even do anything with them.Like pre- emptive hand fighting.

_________________________
I point my saxaphone at the rare Booted Gorilla.

I've been using the straight blast (standard vertical fist style with short punches) a lot lately and EVERY time they cover and just reel back. I use it after slipping outside to the 4o'clock (imagine the oppoenent is at your 12) or ducking to the 3o'clock. The only thing is you betetr be ready for the clinch because after the first 4 or 5 strikes you WILL tie up as if they don't go down they'll start grabbing stuff and your forward movement will put you into grappling range.Distance is huge as well. Circling to the outside with jabs and then quickly stepping in and going up the middle works well too.The previous way I mentioned isn't a blast up the centerline. Knees to the legs are an excellent follow up.

_________________________
Member of DaJoGen MMA school under Dave Hagen and Team Chaos fight team under Denver Mangiyatan and Chris Toquero, ran out of Zanshin Martial Arts in Salem Oregon: http://www.zanshinarts.org/Home.aspx,